Search

Begin New Search Topic Nuclear Weapons Political Geography Middle East

121. Iran, Its Nuclear Ambitions, the Region, and the West

Publication Date:
04-2006
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Liechtenstein Institute on Self-Determination, Princeton University
Abstract:
The Liechtenstein Institute on Self-Determination (LISD) at Princeton University's Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs convened a conference, “Iran, Its Nuclear Ambitions, the Region, and the West,” on 31 March and 1 April 2006. The conference gathered a group of diplomats and international practitioners concerned with the ongoing Iranian nuclear crisis, as well as academics and experts familiar with the nuclear question, Iran, the region, and related policy issues. Over two days of intensive discussions, participants engaged with the pressing issues of Iran's nuclear aspirations based on the internal politics of the country, Iran's interstate relations and the role it occupies within the Middle East and Central Asia, and Iran's and the wider region's relations with Asia and the West. On Friday, participants viewed, via videolink with the Geneva Center for Security Policy in Switzerland, an address delivered at the Center earlier in the day by Manouchehr Mottaki, Foreign Minister of the Islamic Republic of Iran. On Saturday Ambassador Javad Zarif, Permanent Representative of Iran to the United Nations in New York, also participated in the discussions via videolink.
Topic:
Islam, Nuclear Weapons, Weapons of Mass Destruction, and International Affairs
Political Geography:
New York, Iran, Central Asia, Middle East, and Switzerland

122. Iranian Nuclear Weapons? The Options if Diplomacy Fails

Author:
Anthony H. Cordesman and Khalid R. Al-Rodhan
Publication Date:
04-2006
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Center for Strategic and International Studies
Abstract:
There is no way to know what strategy Iran will choose in the future, or how the international community will respond. Iran's possible efforts to acquire nuclear weapons are an ongoing test of the entire process of arms control and the ability limit nuclear proliferation. At the same time, they raise critical issues about how Iran might use such weapons and the security of the Gulf region -- an area with more than 60% of the world's proven conventional oil reserves and some 37% of its gas.
Topic:
International Relations, Security, Diplomacy, and Nuclear Weapons
Political Geography:
Iran and Middle East

123. Iranian Nuclear Weapons? The Uncertain Nature of Iran's Nuclear Programs

Author:
Anthony H. Cordesman and Khalid R. Al-Rodhan
Publication Date:
04-2006
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Center for Strategic and International Studies
Abstract:
There is no simple or reliable way to characterize Iran's ability to acquire weapons of mass destruction and the means to deliver them. Iran is clearly attempting to acquire long-range ballistic missiles and cruise missiles, but it has never indicated that such weapons would have chemical, biological, radiological, or nuclear (CBRN) warheads. Iran has never properly declared its holdings of chemical weapons, and the status of its biological weapons programs is unknown.
Topic:
Security and Nuclear Weapons
Political Geography:
Iran and Middle East

124. Iranian Nuclear Weapons? Iran's Missiles and Possible Delivery Systems

Author:
Anthony H. Cordesman and Khalid R. Al-Rodhan
Publication Date:
04-2006
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Center for Strategic and International Studies
Abstract:
It is one thing to have nuclear weapons; it is another to deliver them. This depends on being able to build them small enough to fit current missile warheads or build new missile technology to carry such weapons. In the case of Iran, this depends on knowing the extent of its nuclear technology. For example, if its P-1 or P-2 designs were provided by AQ Khan—the same warhead that was sold to—then it is the Chinese design with 500 kg and 1 m diameter, which can fit Iran's current Shahab-3 missile.
Topic:
Nuclear Weapons and Weapons of Mass Destruction
Political Geography:
Iran, Middle East, and Libya

125. Fuelling confrontation: Iran, the US and the oil weapon

Author:
Anthony Bubalo, Mark P Thirlwell, and Dr. Michael Fullilove
Publication Date:
05-2006
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Lowy Institute for International Policy
Abstract:
The Iranian nuclear issue has entered a critical phase. A draft UN Security Council resolution has been circulated that could pave the way for political and economic sanctions. Should these fail to change Iran's position, the likelihood of military action will grow towards the end of 2006 and into 2007. At the same time, high oil prices have bolstered Iran's ability to defy demands that it give up uranium enrichment and provide greater transparency with respect to its nuclear program. Given current supply, demand and price indicators, oil provides Iran with a very potent weapon with which to respond to punitive measures. However, the economic and political fallout produced by the use of the oil in this way makes it likely Tehran would use such a weapon cautiously.
Topic:
International Relations, Energy Policy, and Nuclear Weapons
Political Geography:
United States, Iran, Middle East, and Australia/Pacific

126. Iran Means What It Says

Author:
Michael Rubin
Publication Date:
01-2006
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research
Abstract:
On February 2, 2006, the International Atomic Energy Agency will meet in Vienna to discuss the nuclear crisis in Iran and, in all likelihood, refer Iran to the United Nations Security Council for being in breach of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty's safeguards agreement. Such a referral will mark a turning point in a decade-long saga. Europe's engagement with Iran has failed. The United States and its European allies have been resolute in their condemnation of the Iranian government decision to resume uranium enrichment. In contrast to previous diplomatic impasses with Tehran, neither Washington nor its European allies appear willing to make further concessions. On January 23, U.S. secretary of state Condoleezza Rice said, “I don't see much room for further discussion in any format [with Iran].” At a January 13, 2006, press conference with German chancellor Angela Merkel, George W. Bush condemned Iran. “Iran, armed with a nuclear weapon, poses a grave threat to the security of the world,” Mr. Bush said. “We will not be intimidated,” Ms. Merkel added. Already, though, there has been one casualty of the diplomatic crisis: the European Union's policy of engagement.
Topic:
International Relations, Nuclear Weapons, and United Nations
Political Geography:
United States, Europe, Iran, Washington, Middle East, Tehran, Germany, and Vienna

127. Facing Iran's Challenge: Safeguarding Oil Exports from the Persian Gulf

Author:
Simon Henderson
Publication Date:
06-2006
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
The Washington Institute for Near East Policy
Abstract:
In a June 4 speech marking the anniversary of the death of his predecessor, Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, Iranian supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei issued a warning to the United States in the crisis of over Iran's nuclear program. “If the Americans make a wrong move toward Iran, the shipment of energy will definitely face danger, and the Americans would not be able to protect energy supply in the region,” Khamenei said. This raises questions about the strength of the Iranian military and how the United States could counter it, using military power, alternative export routes, or a combination of both.
Topic:
Energy Policy and Nuclear Weapons
Political Geography:
United States, Iran, and Middle East

128. Assessing the Iranian Nuclear Threat with Reference to Pakistan's Experience

Author:
Simon Henderson
Publication Date:
05-2006
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
The Washington Institute for Near East Policy
Abstract:
On April 30, the Sunday Times of London reported that Israeli Mossad chief Meir Dagan had warned U.S. officials during a secret visit to Washington of covert Iranian plans for enriching uranium, which may mean Tehran was "nearer to acquiring nuclear weapons than widely believed." The same report quoted Knesset Foreign and Defense Committee chairman Yuval Steinitz as saying that Iran might be only a year from developing a bomb. Meanwhile, International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) director-general and Nobel Peace Prize winner Mohammed ElBaradei is on the record as saying that, once Iran can enrich uranium in quantity, making an actual bomb would only take "a few months." And, in August 2005, the Washington Post reported that the new U.S. National Intelligence Estimate "projected that Iran is about a decade away from manufacturing [sufficient highly enriched uranium] for a nuclear weapon, roughly doubling the previous estimate of five years." In such circumstances it is small wonder if the public is confused, wondering whether some officials are exaggerating the potential danger of a nuclear-armed Iran while others seem to be almost irresponsibly unconcerned. In fact, the statements above are not mutually inconsistent, reflecting instead the discrepancy between hard fact and plausible interpretation. Since Iran's controversial uranium enrichment technology was initially acquired from Pakistan, an examination of that country's progress toward a nuclear bomb is both worthwhile and illuminating.
Topic:
Security and Nuclear Weapons
Political Geography:
Pakistan, United States, Iran, Washington, Middle East, and Tehran

129. Preventing Turkey's Popular Slide away from the West

Author:
Soner Cagaptay
Publication Date:
04-2006
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
The Washington Institute for Near East Policy
Abstract:
Iran's nuclear program presents one more issue on which Washington sees Middle East developments in a different light than does the Justice and Development Party (AKP) government in Turkey. Since coming to power in November 2002, AKP leaders have pursued rapprochement with Damascus and enhanced dialogue with Iran. In March 2006, the AKP welcomed Hamas leaders in Ankara. It is surprising that Turkey, a traditional bastion of Western policies in the Middle East, is promoting close ties with anti-Western actors that have hurt Turkey for decades—Syria provided safe haven to the terrorist Kurdistan Workers Party (PKK) and Iran supported the PKK and radical Islamist terrorists. Why do the Turkish people not resent such policies? The Iraq war and the U.S. agenda for political transformation in the Middle East have clashed with the Turkish people's desire to preserve the Middle Eastern political landscape. What is more, U.S. inaction against the PKK's Qandil enclave in Northern Iraq is angering most Turks in the way Syrian and Iranian support for the PKK upset them in the 1990s. Turkish confusion and anger toward the United States stands in sharp contrast with the improved image of Syria and Iran in Turkey. Meanwhile, with AKP discussing Middle Eastern politics in terms of Islamic codes, some Turks now identify with the region through Islam and not their national identity. The challenge for Washington is to find a way to prevent Turkey's popular slide away from the United States.
Topic:
Conflict Prevention and Nuclear Weapons
Political Geography:
United States, Iraq, Iran, Washington, Turkey, Middle East, Eastern Europe, and Syria

130. Pakistan and the Crescent of Crisis

Author:
Stephen P. Cohen
Publication Date:
04-2005
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
The Brookings Institution
Abstract:
Situated at the intersection of many American and European concerns, Pakistan has been linked to terrorism, nuclear proliferation, and Islamic extremism; it is politically unstable and economically problematic, and has recently undergone a series of crises, some with nuclear overtones, with India. Pakistan is also located at a geostrategic crossroad, bound to India by geography, culture, and chronic enmity; a self-proclaimed Islamic state with many ties to the Muslim and Arab worlds; long-standing ambitions in Afghanistan and We stand Central Asia, and en during military and strategic ties to China and North Korea.
Topic:
Conflict Resolution, Nuclear Weapons, and Terrorism
Political Geography:
Pakistan, Afghanistan, America, Europe, Central Asia, Middle East, and India