nuclear-news

A non hysterical approach to the Iran nuclear issue

Old fears cloud Western views on Iran’s nuclear posturing, Sydney Morning Herald, John Mueller, February 18, 2012 Alarmism about nuclear proliferation is fairly common coin in the foreign policy establishment. And of late it has been boosted by the seeming efforts of Iran or its friends to answer covert
assassinations, apparently by Israel, with attacks and attempted attacks of their own in India, Georgia and Thailand.

A non-hysterical approach to the Iran nuclear issue is entirely possible. It should take several considerations into account. If the
rattled and insecure Iranian leadership is lying when it says it has
no intention of developing nuclear weapons, or if it undergoes a
conversion from that position (triggered perhaps by an Israeli
airstrike), it will find the bombs are essentially useless and a
considerable waste of time, effort, money and scientific talent.

Nuclear weapons have had a tremendous influence on our agonies and
obsessions since 1945, inspiring desperate rhetoric, extravagant
theorising, wasteful expenditure and frenetic diplomatic posturing.
Moreover, there never seem to have been militarily compelling – or
even minimally sensible – reasons to use the weapons, particularly
because of an inability to identify targets that were both suitable
and could not be effectively attacked using conventional munitions.
Iran would most likely ”use” any nuclear capacity in the same way
all other nuclear states have: for prestige (or ego-stoking) and to
deter real or perceived threats. Indeed, as strategist (and Nobel
laureate) Thomas Schelling suggests, deterrence is about the only
value the weapons might have for Iran.
The popular notion that nuclear weapons furnish a country with the
capacity to ”dominate” its area has little or no historical support
– in the main, nuclear threats since 1945 have either been ignored or
met with countervailing opposition, not timorous acquiescence. It thus
seems overwhelmingly likely that if a nuclear Iran brandishes its
weapons to intimidate others or get its way, it will find that those
threatened will ally with others, including conceivably Israel, to
stand up to the intimidation.
Iran’s leadership, though unpleasant in many ways, is not a gaggle of
suicidal lunatics. Thus, as Schelling suggests, it is unlikely it
would give nuclear weapons to a group such as Hezbollah to detonate,
not least because the rational ones in charge would fear that the
source would be detected, inviting devastating retaliation.
Nor is an Iranian bomb likely to trigger a cascade of proliferation in
the Middle East. The proliferation of nuclear weapons has been far
slower than routinely expected because, insofar as most leaders of
most countries, even rogue ones, have considered acquiring the
weapons, they have come to appreciate several defects: the weapons are
dangerous, costly and likely to rile the neighbours……..
http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/politics/old-fears-cloud-western-views-on-irans-nuclear-posturing-20120217-1te94.html

February 18, 2012 - Posted by Christina Macpherson | general