POL 130
Iran
Why do we care about Iran?
Somebody else’s problem? Let the Israeli’s take care of them?
What are US interests in this area? Does Iran threaten these interests?
What options do we have for dealing with Iran?
Containment – The Dangers of a Nuclear Iran: The Limits of Containment
Explain the title
the United States could contain Iran even if it developed a nuclear arsenal by establishing clear "redlines" that Tehran would not be allowed to cross without risking some type of retaliation
it rests on the questionable assumptions that possessing nuclear weapons induces caution and restraint, that other nations in the Middle East would balance against Iran rather than bandwagon with it, that a nuclear-armed Iran would respect new redlines even though a conventionally armed Iran has failed to comply with similar warnings, and that further proliferation in the region could be avoided. It seems more likely that Iran would become increasingly aggressive once it acquired a nuclear capability, that the United States' allies in the Middle East would feel greatly threatened and so would increasingly accommodate Tehran, that the United States' ability to promote and defend its interests in the region would be diminished, and that further nuclear proliferation, with all the dangers that entails, would occur. The greatest concern in the near term would be that an unstable Iranian-Israeli nuclear contest could emerge, with a significant risk that either side would launch a first strike on the other despite the enormous risks and costs involved. Over the longer term, Saudi Arabia and other states in the Middle East might pursue their own nuclear capabilities, raising the possibility of a highly unstable regional nuclear arms race.
Consequences of a nuclear Iran?
1) unstable bipolar nuclear competition in the Middle East between Iran and Israel
2) Iran may be forced to strike first against Israel in a crisis; Israel has a powerful incentive to attack first
3) Pulls US into this conflict to defend Israel
4) Additional nuclear proliferation in the Middle East – Iraq and Saudi Arabia
5) China and Pakistan might help Saudi Arabia
Can Iran be contained by a vigilant US policy?
Is a US nuclear umbrella credible for the nations of the ME?
Would the US people accept such a policy that might result in attacks on the US?
Would the US build a ballistic missile defense system over the Middle East and maintain it?
the United States would confront a fundamental dilemma as it attempted to contain a nuclear-armed Iran: the Iranian actions that are the easiest to deter, namely, a deliberate conventional or nuclear attack, are the least likely forms of Iranian aggression, whereas Iran's most likely forms of aggression, in particular support for terrorism and subversion, are the most difficult to deter.
What should the US do?
the best strategy is a three-track approach that brings diplomacy and sanctions, clandestine action, and the threat of military force into alignment.
First, the United States should continue to apply diplomatic and economic pressure on Iran, both to raise the costs of Iran's pursuing a nuclear weapons capability and to further isolate the country from the international community, its leaders from the Iranian people, and hard-liners within the government from their more pragmatic colleagues.
Second, sabotage Iran's nuclear program.
Third, the United States should bolster its military capabilities in and around the Persian Gulf and deploy there additional b-2 stealth bombers; stockpiles of precision-guided munitions; electronic warfare systems; undersea strike assets, such as guided missile submarines; sea-based missile defense platforms; and possibly a second aircraft carrier strike group.
Washington will likely have to decide between two unattractive options: pursuing a military strike to prevent Iran from going nuclear or implementing a containment strategy to live with a nuclear Iran.
Is this a strategy of deterrence?
Coercion? Is coercion harder or easier that deterrence?
The War Over Containing Iran: Can a Nuclear Iran Be Stopped?
Adamsky, Dima; Sadjadpour, Karim; de Gramont, Diane; Chubin, Shahram; Edelman, Eric S; Krepinevich, Andrew F; Montgomery, Evan Braden; et al. Foreign Affairs90.2 (Mar/Apr 2011): 155-168.
How will Israel respond to a nuclear Iran?
Should we think of containing Iran as Kennan did of the Soviet Union: containment of political threat and not a military threat?
What is lacking in the Middle East is not an influx of high-tech weaponry but more effective measures to diminish Iran's appeal and financial potency. a Marshall Plan for the Middle East would be built on the same philosophy: the goal would be to more effectively contend with Iran's supply of ideological radicalism by attempting to mitigate popular demand for it.
Is there a diplomatic solution?
The aim of U.S. diplomacy should be to reconcile Iran's nuclear ambitions with international concerns about proliferation and address the broader issues raised by Iran's regional behavior. The current Western step-by-step approach is mistaken because it ignores the need for a broad political settlement.