iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
Paul Heroux

GET UPDATES FROM Paul Heroux
 

Iranian Nuclear Program: No Trust, No Evidence

Posted: 05/24/2012 4:08 pm

Pounding the War Drums

Anyone who declares that Iran must not enrich any uranium is on a war path (or least a path to military strikes on Iran and some degree of retaliation from Iran). The question if this is right or wrong is another issue.

Iran has said categorically that they will not stop enrichment for energy. This position leaves Israel in the position where they must decide to act or not. If the past is prologue, we can be certain that Israel will strike.

So where does this leave us?

The United States may be dragged into another avoidable Middle East military conflict very soon.

Israel has said that it will not accept any Iranian uranium enrichment. Iran maintains, correctly, that it is their right to enrich uranium. The U.S. position seems to be that enrichment for verifiable peaceful purposes is acceptable.

At the core of this issue is one of trust. The West does not trust Iran but it is being forced to recognize that Iran has certain rights. Iran on the other hand, doesn't trust that the West, and the U.S. and Israel in particular, are not going to pursue regime change. From the point of view of Israel and the West, Iran isn't the most trustworthy nation.

Iran's View

In sports, if you don't examine your opponent's strategy, you will lose. It's the same thing here, except this is not a game and the stakes are higher. We must look at this from the Iranian point of view to make progress.

It is unlikely that Iran has decided to pursue the planned construction of a nuclear weapon at this point. The most important thing to Iran, even more important than a strategic advantage over Israel, is regime stability. With this in mind, a nuclear weapons program would invite further instability delivered in the form of an attack; the economic sanctions have already contributed to high unemployment, inflation, and low growth.

At the same time, it could be argued that Iran is using negotiation to buy time. This is unlikely to be effective; so long as the IAEA has the ability to monitor their program, we will know if Iran is going to construct a nuclear weapon. It could also be argued that Iran invites an attack on its nuclear facilities because such an attack would be the grounds to throw out IAEA inspectors and withdraw from the NPT, which gives the West eyes into its program.

These latter scenarios have a lower probability because with sanctions increasingly hurting Iran, throwing out the IAEA inspectors from Iran would result in harsher sanctions and Iran would do even more harm to itself economically and politically than nuclear weapons would bring in. Just look at North Korea. The regime knows this.

The scenario that makes the most sense from the Iranian point of view is to develop the capability to later have a weapons program if it felt it needed one. But it is not there at this point.

The bottom line is there is still no evidence that Iran is pursuing a nuclear weapons program and even though we don't trust Iran, the burden of proof rests on the accuser, not the accused. It is impossible for Iran to prove it isn't pursuing a weapons program; it can only prove that it is pursuing an energy program.

Lessons Learned

If the U.S. never invaded Iraq under false pretenses of nuclear WMDs, it is likely that the West would have already struck at Iran. But the international community learned from the mistake of the Bush administration and its insistence that proof could and would one day come in the form of a mushroom cloud.

Israel must recognize that it cannot peacefully dictate to another nation non-negotiable terms. The United States would never tolerate it. Israel would never tolerate it. There is no reason to believe that Iran will tolerate it either. The problem is that Israel has already said it won't back down on its demand that there be no enrichment in Iran.

We may find that the country that is more recalcitrant, inflexible and stubborn is the bigger threat to international peace. Dictating how or what other nations can and can't do is an act of aggression. This is not giving a pass to Iran and all of its aggressive actions over the years towards the US and Israel. But we have to bear in mind that aggression can take many forms.

Negotiation and Diplomacy

The need for negotiation could not by higher. Negotiation is not weak. It is not appeasement. Negotiation is respect. It is humility. It is a demonstration of strength and confidence, over fear and self righteousness. And it is absolutely necessary to avoid military conflict.

The idea that the West is going to have a lower standard of security for Israel than Israel is going to have for itself is a bit insulting to the nations that have stood by Israel over the years, even when it was not in their interests. Iran is a problem nation without question. But other nations need to be careful not to become a problem nation in their own different way. Put another way: nations can't let another nation force them into defining themselves in a way that is not true to who they are.

At the end of the day, before the West, particularly Israel, strikes Iran, we have to ask: where is the proof that Iran is pursuing a nuclear weapons program? Suspicion not the same as evidence.

If Iran were proven to be lying about its program's intentions, I and many others may have a different take on military action against Iran's nuclear facilities. Until that proof is provided, I don't want to see avoidable military action on any country be marginalized over fear of the unknown and unproven.

PAUL HEROUX previously lived and worked in the Middle East, was a senior analyst at the Institute for Defense and Disarmament Studies, and is a frequent guest on TV and radio stations discussing the Middle East. Paul has a Master's in International Relations from the London School of Economics and a Master's from the Harvard School of Government. Paul can be reached at PaulHeroux.MPA@gmail.com.

 

Follow Paul Heroux on Twitter: www.twitter.com/PaulHeroux

FOLLOW WORLD
 
 
  • Comments
  • 15
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Bloggers
Recency  | 
Popularity
11:40 PM on 07/17/2012
The Ayatollah is determined to make the nuclear conflict with Iran about Islam. From the tomb of the Islamic Revolution’s founder, he said…

"The leaders of the Zionist regime are well aware that they are more vulnerable today than any other time and that every misstep and every inappropriate move will strike them like a thunderbolt…. The efforts made by the political communities of the world to magnify the threat posed by a nuclear Iran are based on nothing but a lie because they are afraid of an Islamic Iran, not a nuclear Iran." ( http://thegreatrecession.info/blog/nuclear-iran-not-to-be-feared-as-much-as-islamic-iran-says-ayatollah/ )

His argument to his own people is that the West is concerned about Iran nuclear weapons solely because Iran is solidly Muslim, and the West fears Islam. Moreover, he says we ought to be afraid of Iran specifically because it is Muslim:

"What the enemies of Iran fear, and must fear is not a nuclear Iran but the Islamic Iran."

The Ayatollah is not just saying that the West is is xenophobic and, therefore, fears Islam. He states that the West “must fear” an Islamic Iran.

--David Haggith
04:52 PM on 05/26/2012
What this article and other liberals do not realize is that a nuclear weapon in the hands of Iran would be one of the worst things possible. Ignorant people who ignore the fact that Iran is lying and can not be trusted after they have repeatedly said death to america and israel are in for a rude awakening. The fact they are being sneaky about it only proves they are sneaky and cannot be trusted. If you have a nuclear iran it would destablize the region and cause just as much turmoil as a war would. America should act fast. America is not the ones trying to hide it Iran is. Think about that.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
NTT
Fighting rants with facts
07:43 AM on 05/25/2012
While arguing against military strikes, the article's author does NOT believe mullahs' claim of "peaceful nuclear applications". Nor do Western leaders & (to judge by the sanctions) pretty much the rest of the world. That's because it's NOT credible.

There're two "peaceful applications":
- Nuclear energy
Requires uranium enriched to 3.5%. The mullahs enrich to 20%, despite huge expenses.
Iran has immense reserves of oil. Current production vastly exceeds energy consumption -- making it one of the main exporters for decades to come.
Given local oil availability, nuclear energy is considerably more expensive.
Iran invested huge financial & human resources in nuclear facilities -- neglecting many other priorities. For instance, despite the huge oil production Iran has insufficient oil refineries -- so while exporting lots of crude it imports gasoline!

- Medical isotopes
Requires 20% enriched uranium. But mullahs' regime already has enough 20% to cover the entire GLOBAL demand for medical isotopes for 3 years!

The mullahs' claim of "peaceful intentions" becomes even more incredible once we remember they already developed long-range missiles capable of carrying nuclear payloads; & that IAEA found evidence of development of nuclear triggering devices.

All this is the reason for international community's decision (with a level of consensus never encountered before) to apply severe sanctions. Unfortunately, it doesn't seem to help. The international community showed willingness to negotiate a peaceful termination to mullahs' nuclear weapons program. But they seem to view negotiations as a stalling opportunity -- & time is running out.
02:02 PM on 05/25/2012
this article makes clear, israel tries to impose zero enrichment, which is guaranteed by the NPT.
iran before 2010 limited its enrichment to 3%, yet the West has sanctioned this country. so there is nothing that Iran can do to enforce its rights except move forward.
if israel or usa attacks iran, this country will have no choice but to develop nuclear weapons, to any government would definitely do the same !
and they are sure to succeed, all military experts and others agree on this.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
NTT
Fighting rants with facts
07:00 AM on 05/25/2012
>>>"The scenario that makes the most sense from the Iranian point of view is to develop the capability to later have a weapons program if it felt it needed one. But it is not there at this point."

I agree with this statement -- with a corollary: "develop[ing] the capability to later have a weapons program" is, in effect, a weapons program.

At the current rate, within 3-12 months the mullahs' regime will be at the point where it already has enough enriched uranium to build a bomb. More importantly, the actual bomb-building is practically impossible to detect -- and hence it is impossible to prevent without full-scale military invasion & occupation. This is in stark contrast to the enrichment stage: enrichment cannot be hidden, because it necessitates huge facilities to house a large number of centrifuge, operating over a long period of time. These facilities can be detected and destroyed by aerial bombardment. The actual bomb-making, however, can be performed within months in a small hidden location (even a cave!).

In simple terms, once the mullahs' regime acquires "nuclear weapons capability" (i.e. accumulates enough enriched uranium), there's no telling if, when or where they'll build the actual bomb. This is why the only way to prevent the very unappealing prospect of potential suicide nuclear bombers is to stop the mullahs BEFORE they acquire enough enriched uranium.
02:07 PM on 05/25/2012
all countries of the world should have to reserve a possibility to defend themselves, no sane country would remain indefinitely disarm against the Israeli nuclear. nobody can guarantee to Iran, that Israel will one day become insane and uses its nuclear weapons.
so to keep "nuclear option year" in the future is normal from under the NPT and it's lawful
10:07 PM on 05/24/2012
The topic of Iran amongst Presidential candidates, excluding Ron Paul, is almost out of this planet. When surrounded by threats, why should Iran not have the right to even have the weapon? Because the lobby’s insistence that they would push the button, even though it would be the end of the Islamic regime which is the opposite of their primary objective of survival, the very next day after obtaining one. Saddam was the one who attacked Iran with our support not so long ago. Iran helped us in Afghanistan while Saudi Arabia is treated like a best friend. Because of a possible oil embargo, Saudi Arabia gets away with …
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Cory Gudwin
examine thyself before blaming the system
09:34 AM on 05/25/2012
Debating "rights" is pointless. Every region has a dominant military power.
In that region, it is Israel.
Iran has been at war with Israel every year via Hezbollah.
Israel has stated it will not tolerate a nuclear-armed Iran. And it won't.
If the inteligence services in Israel discover weapons work in Iran, a war will begin.
01:48 PM on 05/25/2012
Rights are pointless to the ones who care not about anyone’s rights because of their own greed and power, displaying the utmost of hypocrisy while playing the victim role. Israel is the dominant military power due to our tax dollars. Hezbollah is a product of Israeli aggression and invasion, check the history, Israel can thank “itself” for that. Iran and Israel have had relations in the past and potentially could in the future, more than Israel could with Arab states in the long term. The false Iran threat is only an excuse to take the attention away from the Palestinian issue. If a war was started by Israel, it would threaten its own existence and again they could thank themselves for that.
02:14 PM on 05/25/2012
not really the issue, if israel will tolerate a nuclear Iran or not. the real question is israel, a country of 7 million people can prevent a vast country populated by 80 million people, to develop the nuclear? the response is obviously no, even the united States may not, except invasion and indefiniteoccupation.
in israel there's a sick mind, seriously think they can prevent Iran from continuing. it is losing the sense of realities.

war can begin, but one thing is certain, israel will tire long before iran, and will not prevent iran to gets nuclear if it want it really !
photo
HUFFPOST BLOGGER
Sourav Roy
05:10 PM on 05/24/2012
Brilliantly written. Probably the most accurate description of the situation on ground.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
09:50 PM on 05/24/2012
Except author forgot to mention that Israel is OK with 3.5% enrichment needed for energy generation in Iran. Israel does not mind that 20% enriched material is imported by I ran in quantities needed for medical use
10:38 PM on 05/24/2012
Israel is "okay with" and Israel "does not mind". What pray gives them the right to even say those things?
02:19 PM on 05/25/2012
First, Israel has nothing to ask iran absolutely nothing. Secondly you are clearly wrong Netanyahu said iran must stop all enrichment, and dismantle all iranian facilitys! and Mofaz said even not nuclear for civilan use!