IRAN -- NUCLEAR PROGRAM
AP Photo
July 19, 2008
"Bush's U-turn Toward Common Sense"
Op-Ed, Los Angeles Times
By Graham Allison, Director, Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs; Douglas Dillon Professor of Government; Faculty Chair, Dubai Initiative
Graham Allison applauds the decision by the Bush administration to send U.S. Undersecretary of State William Burns to the European Union meeting with Iran on Saturday (July 19). This "flip-flop toward reality," Allison says, "represents a major step in overcoming fierce internal struggles within the U.S. and Iran that had left both stuck at stalemate."
July 11, 2008
"Joseph Nye on Smart Power in Iran-U.S. Relations"
Q&A
By Joseph S. Nye, Sultan of Oman Professor of International Relations and Kayhan Barzegar, Research Fellow, Project on Managing the Atom/International Security Program
This interview elaborates on the applicability of Nye’s theory of “smart power” in the context of the Middle East and particularly Iran. The discussion further pushes the boundaries on how the current U.S policymakers should take into account soft and smart power towards Iran.
Nye: “… if the Americans, in efforts to try to stop the Iranian’s nuclear weapons program, were to bomb nuclear facilities in Iran, they might gain a few years of slowing down the nuclear weapons program but they would lose the whole generation of younger Iranians who would respond in a nationalistic way. So I think that would be a very large cost for a very limited benefit.”
AP photo
Summer 2008
"Closing Time: Assessing the Iranian Threat to the Strait of Hormuz"
Journal Article, International Security, issue 1, volume 33
How might Iran retaliate in the aftermath of a limited Israeli or U.S. strike? The most economically devastating of Iran's potential responses would be closure of the Strait of Hormuz. According to open-source order of battle data, as well as relevant analogies from military history and GIS maps, Iran does possess significant littoral warfare capabilities, including mines, antiship cruise missiles, and land-based air defense. If Iran were able to properly link these capabilities, it could halt or impede traffic in the Strait of Hormuz for a month or more. U.S. attempts to reopen the waterway likely would escalate rapidly into sustained, large-scale air and naval operations during which Iran could impose significant economic and military costs on the United States — even if Iranian operations were not successful in truly closing the strait. The aftermath of limited strikes on Iran would be complicated and costly, suggesting needed changes in U.S. force posture and energy policy.
Summer 2008
"Divining Nuclear Intentions: A Review Essay"
Journal Article, International Security, issue 1, volume 33
By William C. Potter and Gaukhar Mukhatzhanova
Although projections of nuclear proliferation abound, they rarely are founded on empirical research or guided by theory. Even fewer studies are informed by a comparative perspective. The two books under review—The Psychology of Nuclear Proliferation: Identity, Emotions, and Foreign Policy, by Jacques Hymans, and Nuclear Logics: Alternative Paths in East Asia and the Middle East, by Etel Solingen, are welcome exceptions to this general state of affairs, and represent the cutting edge of nonproliferation research. Both works challenge conventional conceptions of the sources of nuclear weapons decisions and offer new insights into why past predictions of rapid proliferation failed to materialize and why current prognoses about rampant proliferation are similarly flawed. While sharing a number of common features, including a focus on subsystemic determinants of national behavior, the books differ in their methodology, level of analysis, receptivity to multicausal explanations, and assumptions about decisionmaker rationality and the revolutionary nature of the decision. Where one author emphasizes the importance of the individual leader’s national identity conception in determining a state’s nuclear path, the other explains nuclear decisions primarily with regard to the political-economic orientation of the ruling coalition. Notwithstanding a tendency to overinterpret evidence, the books represent the best of contemporary social science research and provide compelling interpretations of nuclear proliferation dynamics of great relevance to scholars and policymakers alike.
AP Photo
June 25, 2008
"A Disastrous Attack on Iran?"
Op-Ed, The Jerusalem Post
By Chuck Freilich, Senior Fellow, International Security Program
"...Only if the US proves to both domestic and world opinion that it has exhausted all diplomatic possibilities, will it gain support for major economic sanctions, let alone future military action. Iran will probably reject the offer, as it has all others, but we will only know if the option is pursued and it is a vital way station on the road to stronger measures. Talking to Iran does not imply acquiescence, or appeasement."
AP Photo
June 2008
Military Elements in a Strategy to Deal with Iran's Nuclear Program
Paper
By Dr. Ashton B. Carter, Co-Director, Preventive Defense Project, Harvard & Stanford Universities
PDP Co-Director Ashton B. Carter explores military elements in the U.S. strategy for addressing Iran's nuclear program.
AP Photo
April 24, 2008
Case Study: Red Teaming Iran's Supreme Leader
Memorandum
By Graham Allison, Director, Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs; Douglas Dillon Professor of Government; Faculty Chair, Dubai Initiative
When the key finding of the December National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) on Iran was emerging, the intelligence community assigned a group to "red team" Iran's behavior. They were asked to assume that Iran's intention was to deceive the United States into concluding that the Iranian nuclear program had been halted. Although the red team made a persuasive case that Iran's actions were consistent with this objective, the intelligence community ultimately rejected that hypothesis and came to the conclusion it reported.
AP Photo
April 24, 2008
Blocking Iran's Nuclear Bomb
Testimony
By Graham Allison, Director, Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs; Douglas Dillon Professor of Government; Faculty Chair, Dubai Initiative
Belfer Center Director Graham Allison testified before a subcommittee of the U.S. Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Government Affairs on April 24, 2008. He discussed Iran’s nuclear ambitions, current U.S. strategy, and future policy options for blocking Iran’s nuclear bomb.
AP Photo
March 24, 2008
"India-Iran Relations: Key Security Implications"
Policy Brief
By Xenia Dormandy, Director of the Belfer Center's Project on India and the Subcontinent and Ronak D. Desai
While India and the United States have embarked on a campaign to strengthen their bilateral relations, as symbolized by the proposed US-India civilian nuclear deal, it appears as though New Delhi has similarly begun to pursue a more robust relationship with another major power: Iran. The two states have recently expanded cooperation in a number of key areas, including counterterrorism, regional stability, and energy security. What are the implications of this "New Delhi-Tehran Axis" for the United States, and how should Washington respond to growing ties between India and Iran?
Marcus Halevi
March 12, 2008
Burns Calls for More US Engagement with Iran
Event Summary
Nicholas Burns spoke March 11 in the John F. Kennedy Jr. Forum, labeling the top challenges facing the world today as global climate change, trafficking in women and children, international drug and crime cartels, and terrorist groups with access to chemical and biological weapons. This last challenge motivated the focus on Iran.
