Iran S Nuclear Future

As Iran?'s nuclear program evolves, U.S. decisionmakers will confront a series of critical policy choices involving complex considerations and policy trade-offs. These policy choices could involve dissuading Iran from developing nuclear weapons; deterring Iran from using its nuclear weapons, if it were to acquire them; and reassuring U.S. regional partners. The U.S. Air Force will need to prepare to carry out whatever policies are chosen.

As Irans nuclear program evolves, U.S. decisionmakers will confront a series of critical policy choices involving complex considerations and trade-offs. The U.S. Air Force will need to prepare to carry out whatever policies are chosen.

International suspicion surrounding Iran's nuclear activities was first aroused in the late 1980s and early 1990s. However, it was not until the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) launched an intensive investigation into the Iranian nuclear program in 2002, that it was revealed that Iran had enriched uranium and separated plutonium in undeclared facilities in the absence of IAEA safeguards. In January 2006, Iran began to ignore limitations on nuclear fuel cycle activities yet again, in defiance of the broad opinion of the international community and despite both offers of assistance and the threat of sanctions. To discuss the issue of Iran's nuclear program and its possible future repercussions on regional and global security, the Emirates Center for Strategic Studies and Research (ECSSR) hosted a symposium entitled Iran's Nuclear Program: Realities and Repercussions, in Abu Dhabi on February 26, 2006. Visiting experts were invited to share their views on the Iranian nuclear program, its likely development and the extent to which the potential threat of nuclear weapons could destabilize the Arabian Gulf and the broader Middle East region. This volume represents a valuable collection of these expert views, covering Iran's current nuclear capability and its potential to develop atomic weapons; the changes and developments in Iran's nuclear program since the 2005 Iranian presidential elections; Israeli foreign policy in relation to Iran; the possible impact that an Iranian nuclear program could have on the security of the GCC; and the prospect of military action against Iran.

In July 2015, eight parties – France, Germany and the United Kingdom, together with the European Union and China, Russia and the United States on the one side, and Iran on the other – adopted the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), better known as the Iran nuclear deal. Under the agreement, Iran accepted limits to its nuclear programme in return for sanctions relief. Hailed by some as a diplomatic achievement, detractors – both in the US and the Middle East – saw the deal as overly lenient. In May 2018, US President Donald Trump announced that the US would cease waiving sanctions and withdraw from the agreement. This Adelphi book assesses that Trump’s decision was a grave error. Like any multilateral agreement, the deal was not perfect, but Iran had been honouring its commitments. Drawing on a deep understanding of the non-proliferation regime and technical expertise, the authors trace the emergence of antipathy to the JCPOA and set out how many of the politicised criticisms of the accord are demonstrably incorrect. They argue that the little-known Procurement Channel – established by the JCPOA to give Iran a legitimate route to procure goods and services for its now-limited nuclear programme – has been an effective check on Iran’s illicit procurement of nuclear-related goods. Moreover, this book demonstrates that Iran’s nuclear and ballistic-missile programmes are not intrinsically linked, as not all Iranian missiles are designed to be nuclear-capable. While the deal endures for now, its survival will ultimately depend on Iran.

Iran's nuclear program is one of this century's principal foreign policy challenges. Despite U.S., Israeli, and allied efforts, Iran has an extensive enrichment program and likely has the technical capacity to produce at least one nuclear bomb if it so chose. This study assesses U.S. policy options, identifies a way forward, and considers how the United States might best mitigate the negative international effects of a nuclear-armed Iran.

Turkey, with a robust modern economy and growing energy needs, is pursuing a switch to nuclear power. But that shift is occurring in an environment fraught with security challenges: Turkey borders Iraq, Syria, and Iran—all states with nuclear or WMD ambitions or capabilities. As a NATO member, Turkey also hosts U.S. nuclear bombs on its territory, although some question the durability of this relationship. This dynamic has naturally led to speculation that Turkish leaders might someday consider moving beyond a civilian course to develop nuclear weapons. Yet there has been remarkably little informed analysis and debate on Turkey's nuclear future, either within the country or in broader international society. This volume explores the current status and trajectory of Turkey's nuclear program, adding historical perspective, analytical rigor, and strategic insight.

This monograph reexamines the strategic implications for the United States in the event Iran moves ahead to acquire nuclear weapons capability. This study draws on expert workshops held in the Institute for National Strategic Studies (INSS) at the National Defense University (NDU) in January and February 2005, as well as meetings, interviews, and research conducted at NDU and elsewhere over the past several years. Chapters are as follows: "Iran's Perspective: National Rights and Nuclear Weapons," "Neighbors, Negotiators, and Nonproliferators," and "U.S. Policy Options." Appendixes include "Timeline of Iran's Path to Nuclear Weapons," "Iran's Nuclear Program: Status, Risks, and Prospects," and "Walking the Tightrope: Israeli Options in Response to Iranian Nuclear Developments."

With tensions between Iran, Israel, and Western powers reaching new highs over the Islamic Republic’s nuclear enrichment program, the tenth edition of the Munk Debates investigates how the world should respond to Iran’s nuclear ambitions. For some, the case for a pre-emptive strike on Iran is ironclad. An Iranian bomb would flood the volatile Middle East with nuclear weapons and trap Israel in a state of perilous insecurity — along with much of the world’s oil supply. Others argue that a nuclear Iran could be the very stabilizing force that the region needs, as the threat of nuclear war makes conventional conflicts more risky. These same voices also ask: can the West and Israel afford to attack Iran when doing so could roll back the Arab Spring and re-entrench reactionary forces throughout the Middle East? In this edition of the Munk Debates — Canada’s premier international debate series — former Israel Defense Forces head of military intelligence Amos Yadlin, Pulitzer Prize–winning political commentator Charles Krauthammer, CNN host Fareed Zakaria, and Iranian-born academic Vali Nasr debate the consequences of a nuclear-armed Iran. For the first time ever, this electrifying debate, which played to a sold-out audience, is now available in print, along with candid interviews with the debaters. With tempers flaring between governments, the world’s oil supply in peril, and global security at risk, the Munk Debate on Iran tries to answer: Can the world tolerate an Iran with nuclear weapons?