Foreign Policy Blogs

Nuclear Iran Back in the Limelight

As the protests in Iran seem unlikely to fuel regime change, the prospects of the radical Shi’ite regime obtaining a nuclear weapon returns to the forefront of international debate. 

Notably, comments made yesterday by Vice President Joe Biden and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Adm. Mike Mullen signal the lack of an internal consensus on how to approach Iran. Biden repeatedly stressed that Israel remains a sovereign country and could attack any country, including Iran, without consulting the United States. Some analysts spun the comments as a “green light” to Israel for an attack, while administration officials rejected the notion that Biden’s comments signal a change in U.S. posture. Even though he did not explicitly advocate a strike, Biden stressed the Iran must make some concessions in order to engage the west, particularly through dialogue with the P-5. 

Conversely, Mullen stated that any strike on Iran could lead to a series of unintended consequences that may further destabilize the region. His hesitation for a military solution to resolve the Iran threat does not diminish his unease towards a nuclear Iran. 

Meanwhile, Israeli officials reportedly pressured their U.S. and European counterparts to prepare an alternative strategy to prevent Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons in the event that dialogue with the regime fails. The “Plan B” strategy would include intense economic sanctions and would not exclude the possibility of a military campaign. U.S. officials remain skeptical over the success of dialogue but they fear that premature posturing towards sanctions would sabotage any potential for an improved relationship with Iran.

The comments from these high ranking officials could constitute a warning to the Iranian regime that the West will not maintain its toothless opposition to the nuclear program. The veiled potential acceptance of an Israeli attack could pressure Iran into increased transparency of its nuclear program. Moreover, the rallying of European support for increased sanctions represents another step towards isolating Iran to add economic stress on the regime. Further, reports that Israel obtained permission to use Saudi Arabian airspace in a strike represent another overture to tacitly threaten the Iranian regime. 

Responding to the threat of an Israeli air-strike on Iran’s nuclear sites, the head of the Iranian parliamentary committee on national security and foreign policy Alaeddin Broujerdi threatened both the United States and Israel that his country would respond with “real and decisive” actions, urging caution to the “consequences” of an attack. The Iranian military is no match for either the IDF or U.S. forces; however, the Iranian military likely has hundreds of conventional missiles targeting Israel that would result in extensive civilian casualties. These missiles could also target U.S. troops in Iraq in response to military action against the regime. Further, Iranian support for terror groups could sharply increase, leading to more attacks on American troops in Iraq or against the Israeli public.
 

Author

Ben Moscovitch

Ben Moscovitch is a Washington D.C.-based political reporter and has covered Congress, homeland security, and health care. He completed an intensive two-year Master's in Middle Eastern History program at Tel Aviv University, where he wrote his thesis on the roots of Palestinian democratic reforms. Ben graduated from Georgetown University with a BA in English Literature. He currently resides in Washington, D.C. Twitter follow: @benmoscovitch

Areas of Focus:
Middle East; Israel-Palestine; Politics

Contact