The Iranians have announced thta they have achieved uranium enrichment-in a small pilot plant. Unofficial reports suggest that most of the centrifuges they are using have a number of problems-including disintegrating when spun at high RPMs. In addition, the purity of the UF6 gas they have poduced is suspect. So , given that this is a mostly symbolic achievment, why is everybody so worried? It will take years (at this rate) for the Iranians to get enough enriched Uranium to build a few small bombs. They will also have to test them…so I expect that it will be a long time till Iran is a real threat.
Is there any hard evidence that Iran is anymore dangerous now, thab they were a year ago?
Well, they’re a year closer to having perfected what they’re trying to do. They didn’t just decide a month ago to try to build a nuclear weapon.
So we should drop it and wait a few years until they are a real threat with a few bombs and… then what?
An equally interesting question is why Iran is trumpeting this news everywhere, holding military manoevers, etc?
There can be no question that Iran is provoking the world as best it can. The best way for them to get a nuke without being attacked is to quietly go about the business of building one while making non-threatening noises and promising to play nice. But that’s not what they’re doing. They’re acting belligerantly and openly flaunting their nuclear prowess. This is hardening world opinion against them and making it more likely that someone will deliver the big smack-down. So why?
Possible answers:
- The leadership is nuts.
- The leadership is fanatical.
- The leadship is full of fanatical nuts.
or…
-
They’re doing it for internal political reasons. Either to rally the fanatical nuts and shore up the radical nut support, or because they believe it will unite the people (who otherwise wouldn’t mind building Discos and watching MTV-2), or for some other more obscure reason.
-
They’re trying to fill the middle east power vacuum left by the incarceration of S. Hussein, and ascend to being the great power in the region.
-
Did I mention they could be nuts? The worst possible reason of all is that the current leaders are increasingly followers of an apocalyptic sect of Islam that actually wants war, because it will hasten the return of the 12th Imam, Jesus, and I think Elvis. The thin one. Not the fat bloated Elvis.
The way I see it, the US just bluffed on a short stack with an off-suit three and nine with a bunch of chips in the pot already, Iran called the bluff and threw some more chips in the pot.
I know there has been a lot of talk along the 6 points Sam Stone makes in his post. And I’m not going to say 1-4 and 6 are wrong, just that I think 5 is the most likely. I think pursuing a nuke is, from an Iranian point of view, quite a logical thing to do if they want to fill a power vacuum.
I’d add to that that the simplest reason is that Iran wants a nuke because Israel has a nuke and it would immediately put them on an even level with the Israelis and the Americans in the region.
If I were to squint and look at this from the perspective of Iran, they have destabilized states to the west and to the east. Especially to the west. If Iraq descends into civil war, Iran probably sees that it will need to do something about securing itself plus or minus the millions of Shi’ites in Iraq. Same thing with Afghanistan. There are two (big) things standing in the way of Iran doing this – first is the USA and second is Israel. Hence the USA on the short stack (a weak president) with a three and an eight (militarily overburdened) and a lot of chips in the pot (Iraq). The USA bluffs by leaking its plans for war, maybe including strategic nukes. And Iran answers “bring it on.”
Ahmadinejad is just the Iranian George W. Bush with the same inane, idiotic “bring it on” bravado, caring more about macho swagger than real consequences for human beings in the real world. The real question for me is what is up with countries that vote for such maroons.
I’d add that Iran full well knows that there’s a snowball’s chance in hell that the USA is going to do anything militarily to Iran. (I know what Sy Hersh says, but it sounds to me all like donder und blitzen. Then again, I will not be fooled into under/overestimating this administration again).
I’m sure the prospect of a large army pouring over the border, uniting Shi’ite insurgents to work with them, and attacking the American troops directly, is not relishing. So another factor might be that if Iran ever wants a nuke, now’s really the best time to do it.
They have a window of opportunity atm. The US is tied down in Iraq, we are increasingly under attack internationally and at home for our invasion, and even if we wanted too the most we could do about Iran atm is a Clintonesque tossing of a few Tomahawks and hope the problem blows over. I doubt Bush has the political capital at this point to drop fliers on Iran with nasty messages on them. If he DOES mount an air campaign against Iran (or only REAL military option…especially considering we’d be going this one completely alone most likely) then I’ll be stunned…it would show a willingness both for personal political suicide as well as probable political suicide for the 'Pubs in the short term. I don’t see GW having that kind of backbone despite his ‘cowboy’ persona.
Europe isn’t going to get off the dime no matter WHAT Iran does (short of parking a nuke in London or Paris with a big ‘From Iran with love’ sticker pasted on the side…or perhaps attempting economic reform in France by fiat 
)…they will wring their hands and hem and haw…and eventually they will have procrastinated enough that Iran will have the things by default. At which point the Europeans will probably bitch and complain that the US should have done something about it…oh, and maybe a few protests thrown in for good measure. THAT will really show them, ehe? 
China and Russia are both on board for allowing Iran to have the things (economics and oil you know) and will block whatever feeble attemps either the US or Europe does manage to put together to halt or slow down the Iranians.
Long and the short of it is Iran will be a nuclear power within the decade unless something radical changes…which I don’t see happening.
As for the overt bluster I figure thats for their publics (and maybe a wider ME audiance) consumption. They CAN bluster at this point because they have that window of opportunity to do so…and it sells well to the feebs back home who eat this stuff up. I figure most of the population is apathetic at best about the prospect of their government getting nukes…but the wild eyed are probably over joyed, and they ARE quite, um, vocal. :eek:
-XT
Are you talking about the Iranian citizenry, or the Americans?
They won’t be a “real threat”, unless we invade. That’s assuming it only takes a “few years” as well.
How about as an attempt to lure America into attacking ineffectually ( conventionally ), or outrageously ( nukes ). Either will likely hurt America worse than Iran, and shore up the conservatives power.
It would probably be easier to take the moral high ground, and with that more direct action, if it wasn’t for the American nuclear launch pad (aka Israel) just down the road, wouldn’t it?
Let Iran have her time in the sun. It’s as much to do with internal consumption as anything else. The Islamic Revolution will only last so long before that massive baby boom she’s experiencing kicks out the old guard with something far more realistic and harmonious - relative to her neighbours that is. It won’t happen in 5 years, but it might happen in 15. It actually looked pretty promising prior to September Eleven, but bin Laden made everything go haywire - and let’s be frank… President Bush’s “Axis of Evil” which included Iran in his 1992 State of The Union Address probably did far more harm in terms of polarising Iran in the wrong way that it needed to - but hey, you can’t undo spilt milk.
One thing’s for sure… if the Kuwait invasion of 1990 proved anything it’s this - certain lines in the sand simply WON’T be allowed to be crossed in the Middle East without China and Russia simply saying “Whoah… too hard” and thereupon allowing the United States to mobilise a massive force with carte blanche permission to put things to right. Indeed, that’s the main mistake regarding Iraq’s problems right now, but it is what it is.
Iran’s power elite are choosing to play the manipulative nationlist card right now to shore up their power base - and it’s ultimately an artificial form of self validation in reality. Purely from a logistics point of view, Tehran knows that if they launched a first-strike nuclear attack - whether that be against Israel or anyone else in reality - that it would be a death wish. Millions upon millions of Iran’s citizens would die in the almost instantaneous response. Yes, perhaps Iran could launch a covert shipment not by air, but rather in a manner similiar to Clancy’s “Sum of All Fears” but even then, the atomic fingerprint of the uranium which was used would still point the finger inarguably at Iran and the deathwish would still happen.
I personally have a lot of faith in the youth of Iran. They’ve got LOTS of internet access, and they’re not dumb. They’ll realise quite soon that their government is playing all sorts of dangerous populist cards. And worse yet, it’s doing Iran’s capacity to do commerce way more harm than good. But all that aside, I can’t see Iran getting to the nuclear weapon stage. Just way too many players don’t want that to happen at the UN nation-state level. The US has a lot of cards to play yet with both China and Russia which will show themselves in time. In particular, China needs the United States at a commerce level far more than the US needs China. All those billions of dollars in US Treasury Bonds that China holds are a very strategic bargain stick I rather think.
Looking at things from Iran’s perspective, they’re in a pretty bad situation right now. They have two neighbors (Afghanistan and Iraq) that are being run by their enemy (us) via puppet governments. And Iraq is degenerating into anarchy. Plus, they have the barbarian thugs of the Middle East (Israel) not too far away.
If Iraq degenerates into civil war, there will be a lot of people in Iran who would want their army to move into Iraq to aid the Shiites. Certainly, Turkey will be moving in to lay the smack down on the Kurds. (They’ve said before that they will not allow the formation of an independant Kurdish state.)
Basically, Iran is in a position where it needs to look tough. Flaunting their nuclear weapons program is a good way to do this.
A few background facts for the discussion:
-
There is no evidence that Iran is trying to develop a nuclear bomb.
-
They have never said they want to develop a nuclear bomb.
-
Until very recently they have continuously, explicitly and strenuously denied ever wanting to get a nuclear bomb. A recent statement even says they don’t need a nuclear bomb.
Heck, even I think they need a nuclear bomb and they should try to develop one.
Question:
It was my understanding that under the NPT they have a right to enrich uranium, plain and simple. Maybe I missed some piece of news, but anybody know why there should be a UNSC a resolution calling for them not to? Why would they heed such an arbitrary resolution?
- Iran’s leaders are intelligent and have correctly read the situation. The United States does not have the available troops, nor the popular support to invade Iran. At best they toss a few cruise missles or send a few bombers enraging the populace. The conservative ruling class uses this outrage to solidify its power position and swipe a blow at reformers. At worst, they get to take the extremely popular position in Iran of being anti-US. Win-freaking-Win.
Problem is, Iran’s cosmopolitan, university-educated, Internet-connected youth remain a distinct minority, carry little clout among Iran’s hardline elite, and can be easily and instantly marginalized. For every pro-West young Iranian–whatever “pro-West” really means–there’s five easily manipulated ultra-nationalist yahoos one speech away from a “Death to the [insert hate object]” rally. Moreover, the ultra-conservatives’ grip on power is firm and there’s no shortage of younger hardliners ready to fill their shoes.
Iran’s ruling council is hoping for a rash US military response–especially if an Israel can be shown–or manufactured. Dictators, theocrats or no, have no qualms about trading thousands of innocent lives if, in the bargain, an outside attack solidifies their power base and further marginalizes the internal factions they so detest. In Iran’s book, a punishing US attack is a very good thing–as is a US non-response. That said, if we think the “Death to XXX” rallies of past are scary, wait until Iran detonates their first test bomb out in the desert. The masses’ reaction to the hi-def, Dolby-digital film footage will make Pavlov’s dog look positively unresponsive.
So what, from their POV, would be a bad thing?
Sort of. They have the right to enrich for peaceful purposes, but they have to do it under the supervision of the IAEA - allowing the IAEA full access for inspection, disclose everything, etc. - to make sure they are not enriching for weapons (something they are not allowed to do). The problem is that Iran hid everything from the IAEA then refused to fully cooperate to ensure that they weren’t enriching to weapons grade. The IAEA then did what it is supposed to do under those circumstances and kicked the issue upstairs to the UNSC for them to deal with.
Does anyone suspect Brazil of working on nuclear weapons development?