Published March 19th, 2006 by Future Atlas
Living with a nuclear Iran
David E. Sanger, writing in the NYT, considers whether the world might “learn to live with a nuclear Iran.”
Key points:
- “The reality is that most of us think the Iranians are probably going to get a weapon, or the technology to make one, sooner or later. The optimists around here just hope we can delay the day by 10 or 20 years, and that by that time we’ll have a different relationship with a different Iranian government.” — Bush administration official
- As a state, Iran could be deterred, some think.
- Egypt and Saudi Arabia might seek their own nuclear weapons, but the West could dissuade them.
- Nuclear weapons would make Iran “the dominant regional power in the Middle East,” possibly “as powerful as Israel.”
- Iran doesn’t have to build a bomb; it merely needs people to believe that it can do so quickly.
- The US has said that it cannot “tolerate” a nuclear North Korea, but it is already doing just that.
- Containment might work with Iran, but Iran’s going nuclear would trigger “a world of proliferation like we have not seen before,” according to Brent Scowcroft.
Sanger suggests that this is worth thinking about because all other options might be worse. That seems to be case with military options:
- Airstrikes might or might not delay an Iranian nuclear arms program.
- An American invasion would likely end in defeat, leaving Iran bitter and militant for decades.