Tag: Nuclear weapons
Diplomacy needed to restore security for all
If you haven’t seen it already, the interviews above with Wendy Sherman and Vali Nasr strike me as eminently level headed. Bottom lines: negotiations no longer, regime change unlikely, more and escalating war, Iran will press ahead to get nuclear weapons.
Regional implications
They don’t deal with the regional implications, except for mentioning Saudi denunciation of Israel for the attack on the “brotherly” Islamic Republic of Iran. But Gulf Arab sympathy with Iran will not go much further. The Saudis and the other Gulf monarchies will not be unhappy to see Iran’s nuclear program decimated. Turkey is likewise opposed to the Israeli attack, but it too was uncomfortable with Iran’s nuclear progress.
Perhaps the clearest sign of the regional reaction is what won’t happen. There will be no oil embargo or other concerted action. Improvement of relations with Israel will stall, but that’s about as far as things will go. If Iran were to have serious military success against Israel, things might be different. But with its air defenses ineffective and mostly destroyed, that isn’t likely to happen. And Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu isn’t the only regional leader who would like to see the Islamic Republic collapse.
Impact on the US and Europe
Oil prices are up 7%, but at $72 or so still below where they were 6 months ago and stabilizing. That is well within the realm of tolerable in both Europe and the US. Only if Israel attacks Iran’s oil production facilities will the price jump further into the painful range. That’s one reason the Israelis haven’t done it. Besides, if they want regime change it would be a mistake to hamper the new regime financially.
The increase to $72 will give Russia some extra rubles, but not a whole lot. In the rest of Europe, consumers will see only small percentage increases, as energy supplies are heavily taxed. Even in the US, lax market conditions mean little serious increase for now.
Iran and Russia are now military allies who supply each other with weapons. Tehran may find it more difficult, or perhaps just less desirable, to supply drones and ammunition to Moscow. Russia’s military production is already stretched tight and won’t be able to help Iran much.
President Trump is cheerleading for the Israelis now, after having tried unsuccessfully to prevent their attack on Iran. That will bring unwanted attention to US troops and travelers in the Middle East. It may also precipitate incidents inside the US. If Israel gets into trouble, the Americans will need to provide more assistance. But that seems unlikely.
The balance of power
The Israelis have enfeebled Iran. Hamas is in a cage. Hezbollah is decimated. The Houthis are still active, but on a minimal scale. Iran itself has lost its air force, its air defenses, much of its senior military leadership, key scientists and engineers. Tehran’s only quick route to restoring deterrence is nuclear weapons. If they can, they will.
That will incentivize Turkey and Saudi Arabia to follow suit. Egypt won’t want to be left behind. The Israelis already have nukes. A nuclear Middle East is not a secure Middle East. You can hope nothing bad will happen, but hope is not a policy. Only tough-minded diplomacy can restore security to all.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Trump caused this Israeli war with Iran
Tonight’s Israeli attack on Iran is not a one-time thing. Nor is it a matter of days, as the press is reporting. Assuming the Islamic Republic stays in place, this attack will encourage Iran to try to develop nuclear weapons. Tehran will think that will make it immune.
Israel will need to attack repeatedly over months and years to prevent that. Iran will respond in kind. The consequences for both countries will be catastrophic. The region and the rest of the world will not be insulated. The geopolitical era of might makes right has reached a new low.
Israel impatient, Iran provocative
Prime Minister Netanyahu won a crucial vote in his parliament today that would have brought down his government. He chose not to risk another. Instead he launched an attack said to be on Iran’s nuclear facilities. Some of the video I’ve seen looks a lot more like office buildings downtown. They could be collateral damage, or headquarters facilities. Now besides the Gaza war Netanyahu has another to keep himself in power.
Yesterday the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) censured Iran for not complying with its non-proliferation obligations. Tehran had failed to account for uranium traces in locations that had not been disclosed as used for nuclear purposes. Many have suspected these to be traces of a nuclear weapons program known to have existed until 2003. Maybe also thereafter.
In response to the censure, Iran vowed to build new, more advanced, enrichment facilities. It had already accumulated a significant amount of near-bomb-grade enriched uranium.
The US/Israel angle
The Americans are saying they will not support the Israeli attack by military means. But that doesn’t mean Washington won’t help Israel protect itself from the Iranian response. There is a real risk the US could end up in another Middle East war.
President Trump had wanted a new nuclear deal. He at times has left the door open to Iranian enrichment, or perhaps participation in an international enrichment consortium. The Israelis wanted none of that.
The deal Trump sought would have required irreversible lifting of sanctions on Iran, which Israel also did not want. An negotiated outcome will now have to await the mutually hurting stalemate that can only come after death and destruction. Even then, it is hard to picture a mutually enticing way out. Neither the Islamic Republic nor Netanyahu’s Israel will want to agree with the other.
Tighten your seat belt
We are in for a rough ride. Trump’s 2018 withdrawal from the Iran nuclear deal allowed the Tehran to enrich a lot of uranium. That would not have happened if the deal had continued. Iran’s enrichment beyond the limits of the 2015 deal is the proximate cause of today’s attack. It’s not just the world that’s dangerous. Trump caused this Israeli war with Iran. Add this war to his already long list of failures in his second term.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Nuclear Iran – facts, goals and opportunity
Former IAEA Safeguards Inspector Dr. Pantelis Ikonomou writes:
In May 2018, then President Trump withdrew the US from the 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA). Today, Iran is much closer to possible acquisition of nuclear weapons than at that time.
Facts
The fourth round of nuclear negotiations between the US and Iran was recently completed.
Their continuation will convene soon. That is a promising development. The nuclear issue has fueled Middle East confrontations since May 2018.
Goals
Reportedly, Tehran would accept an agreement limiting its uranium enrichment and relevant material inventories. That would be in exchange for relief from economic sanctions. President Trump has also said he is ready for an agreement that would limit Tehran’s enrichment. In addition, he has threatened Iran with massive bombing if Iran does not accept his proposals.
Limiting enrichment could guarantee Iran does not acquire nuclear weapons. Trump did not, however, clarify whether he also aims at other goals. In the past, the US has sought to dismantle Iran’s nuclear capability, ballistic missile program, and strategic influence in the region.
Israel is the third protagonist in Middle East geopolitical theater. It remains irrevocably opposed to any agreement that does not irreversibly destroy Iran’s nuclear capability. The powerful Israel lobby in the US often asserts decisive influence on Washington. It advocates a maximalist policy of unlimited pressure against Tehran.
The opportunity
There are reliable reports of Tehran making a remarkable proposal. Namely, the setting up of a regional nuclear enrichment consortium with Saudi Arabia and UAE, including US investment. This would be an alternative to shutting down its uranium enrichment.
Such multinational cooperation could be realized within the framework of the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT). It would be the equivalent of the URENCO (Uranium Enrichment Company) plant, which the IAEA monitors. URENCO is a British-German-Dutch uranium enrichment and nuclear fuel consortium that operates facilities in Germany and Netherlands. URENCO uses centrifuge technology, as do the enrichment facilities in Iran.
Such a project would provide the participating States – Saudi Arabia, UAE, and eventually others in the region – with additional confidence in their ability to obtain nuclear fuel for peaceful nuclear programs. At the same time, the scheme would assure the international community that the countries involved are using the sensitive nuclear material exclusively for peaceful purposes. The stringent monitoring and verification regime of the IAEA nuclear Safeguards inspectors would provide that assurance.
History remains a wise teacher
President Trump’s decision to kill in 2018 the 2015 Iran deal was an obvious failure.
Lack of knowledge and planning characterized Trump’s previous negotiations in the similar case of North Korea. He made a series of controversial statements, exchanged letters of admiration with President Kim, and threatened “fire and fury.” After three in-person meetings, Trump left their Hanoi Summit in 2019 unexpectedly without any statement. Since then, North Korea has continued developing its nuclear arsenal completely uncontrolled.
We should by now have learned the lessons.
International anxiety is justified. Will diplomacy or war result?
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Failure and disgrace in 100 days
As they Trump Administration approaches its 100th day April 30, the failures are glaring.
Failures
The most obvious failures are in negotiations. Trump himself laid out the agenda. He wanted:
- The Canal back from Panama.
- To buy Greenland from Denmark.
- Canada as the 51st state.
- Gaza voluntarily emptied and redeveloped as a resort.
- The Ukraine war ended.
- A better nuclear deal with Iran.
- Trade deals that would “correct” bilateral imbalances.
None of this is happening. The first three items are fool’s errands hardly worth discussing. The four later ones are more serious propositions.
Even winning would be losing
The Gaza-a-Lago proposition was a green light for war crimes. The Israelis are trying to force Palestinians out of Gaza. They are failing so far, but they will no doubt persist. This is egregious even from a religious perspective: Biblical Jews did not live in Gaza. No religion, certainly not mine, can approve displacing two million people to please a real estate developer.
Trump is proposing to end the Ukraine war on terms favorable to Russia. Why is not clear, but Moscow would keep the territory it has taken, including Crimea. Kyiv would have to recognize Russia’s annexation of the peninsula. Ukraine would get no security guarantee from the US, which would gain privileged access to its minerals. This is a bad deal, one that that will not end the war, even if Kyiv and Moscow sign on. At best, it will pause the hostilities.
The better nuclear deal with Iran is a possibility. That’s because Trump is prepared to lift many if not all the sanctions. Biden refused to do that, because Washington imposed some of them for human rights violations. The Trump Administration doesn’t care about those. So a better nuclear deal for Trump means American endorsement of the Islamic Republic’s oppression. Not sure that is what Americans really want.
The Administration claims to be negotiating tariff deals with 90 countries. Unless they lower tariffs relative to the previous Administration, they will raise costs for American consumers. The most important of the negotiations is with China. That will end with higher tariffs both on Chinese imports to the US and on American exports to China. Yes, the US government will gain some revenue, though nowhere near as much as the Administration claims. And most of that revenue will come from Americans. Inflation will accelerate. Recession looms.
The disgraces
Trump supports Israeli war crimes in Gaza, Russian victory in Ukraine, endorsement of Islamic Republic human rights abuses, and trade deals that raise prices and slow growth for Americans. Add that to attacking American universities, arbitrary arrest, imprisonment, and deportation of immigrants, and canceling of vital scientific research.
The Administration is weakening the United States. That is the only thing at which it is succeeding in its disgraceful first 100 days.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
A stronger American still fumbles
President Biden made a farewell appearance at the State Department yesterday. As a former Foreign Service officer, I’m of course delighted that he did this. It is especially important and timely because the Department now faces Donald Trump’s threat of loyalty tests and mass firings.
Biden’s understandably directed his remarks at justifying what his Administration has done on foreign policy. So how did he really do?
The bar was low
Certainly Biden can justifiably claim to have strengthened America’s alliances. The bar was low. Both in Europe and Asia the first Trump Administration had raised doubts. Allies could not depend on Washington’s commitment to fulfill its mutual defense obligations. Biden’s claim that compared to four years ago America is stronger because of renewed and expanded alliances is true. He is also correct in claiming he has not gone to war to make it happen.
The extraordinary strength of the American economy is an important dimension of this strength. Voters decided the election in part on the issue of inflation. But the Fed has largely tamed that and growth has been strong throughout. Manufacturing is booming, including vital semi-conductor production. Investment in non-carbon energy sources has soared. The defense industrial based is expanding.
Biden is also correct in asserting that America’s antagonists are worse off. Russia has failed to take Ukraine because of the US effort to gather support for Kyiv. Iran and its allies in Gaza, Lebanon, and Syria are weaker. Only the Houthis in Yemen are arguably stronger than four years ago.
China is facing serious domestic economic and demographic challenges. But I don’t know why Biden claims it will never surpass the US. On a purchasing power parity (PPP) basis, it already has, though obviously per capita GDP in China remains much lower.
Some claims gloss over big problems
Biden is rightly proud that there is no longer war in Afghanistan, but he glosses over the chaotic withdrawal. He also doesn’t mention the failure of the Taliban to keep its commitments.
He vaunts progress on climate change, but without acknowledging that the goal of keeping global warming below 1.5 degrees centigrade will not be met.
Biden talks about infrastructure in Africa. But not about its turn away from democracy, civil wars in Sudan and Ethiopia, and the unresolved conflict in Libya.
He urges that Iran never be allowed to “fire” a nuclear weapon. That is a significant retreat from the position that Iran should never be allowed to have one.
Biden mentions the impending Hamas/Israel ceasefire. But he says nothing about Israel’s criminal conduct of the war in Gaza. Nor does he blame Israel’s right-wing government for the long delay in reaching a deal.
Biden’s legacy
At the end, Biden seeks to bequeath three priorities to Trump: artificial intelligence, climate change, and democracy. He no doubt knows that Trump isn’t going to take the advice on climate or democracy. He might on artificial intelligence, as his Silicon Valley tycoons will want him to.
Sad to say, Biden’s legacy will lie in other areas. Fearful of nuclear conflict with Russia, he failed to give Ukraine all the support it needs to defeat Russia. He was reluctant to rein in Israel for more than a year of the Gaza war. He failed to stop or reverse the Iranian and North Korean nuclear programs. America is stronger than it was four years ago, but it has not always used that strength to good advantage.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Mushroom clouds over the Middle East
Former IAEA inspector Pantelis Ikonomou writes:
After Hiroshima and Nagasaki, nuclear deterrence became the strongest parameter in projecting geopolitical power. Nuclear weapons could eventually be decisive in the Middle East.
Israel and Iran are now in direct confrontation
Safeguarding state security and regional dominance are the fundamental aims of the main protagonists, Israel and Iran. Since spring, they have been confronting each other directly. Two exchanges of missiles have resulted. Further escalation seems irreversible.
Serious questions need serious answers. Where is this dynamic leading? What is next? Is there hope for an end to the escalation after next week’s presidential elections in the US? Is the global superpower willing or even capable of rerouting the war dynamics towards a peaceful direction?
The next American President
Candidate Donald Trump in 2018 withdrew the US unilaterally from the Iran nuclear deal. A few days ago Trump urged Israel to attack Iran’s nuclear facilities. Doing that would force Iran to end its doctrine of strategic patience. Iran would exit the NPT, develop the military dimension of its nuclear program, and construct nuclear warheads. Iranian parliamentarians are already proposing this course of action.
The other candidate, Vice President Kamala Harris, was an important voice in Washington as the current Middle East crisis developed. President Biden has struggled to prevent the escalatory spiral. His effort slowed but not stopped it.
The consequences are dire
Continuation of this situation could force Israel to abandon its doctrine of nuclear opacity. It neither confirms nor denies its nuclear weapons. Prime Minister Meir considered using nuclear weapons during the 1973 Yom Kippur war to respond to Egyptian army advances. Prime Minister Netanyahu could also be forced to consider or threaten their use.
An Iranian decision to pursue nuclear weapons or Israeli confirmation of its nuclear capability would change the situation dramatically. Either or both would challenge the credibility of the Non Proliferation Treaty, the IAEA, and the UN Security Council. Adding Iran to the non-NPT states (India, Pakistan, North Korea, and Israel) could undermine the global security architecture. Mushroom clouds would loom over the Middle East.
RSS - Posts
