The new NIE Annual Threat Assessment on Iran is consistent with my theory that Iran does not intend to build an actual nuclear weapon any time soon, but rather wants to bring their capacity to the point that they can do so on short notice should the need arise. From the NIE Annual Threat Assessment (warning: pdf):
We continue to assess Iran is keeping open the option to develop nuclear weapons in part by developing various nuclear capabilities that bring it closer to being able to produce such weapons, should it choose to do so. We do not know, however, if Iran will eventually decide to build nuclear weapons.
As Steve Hynd reminds us, this is “what Japan, for instance, already has and is sometimes known as a ‘virtual deterrent.’” Iran’s attempt to attain such a virtual deterrent makes a lot of sense for at least a couple of reasons: First, Iran is wary of U.S. intentions and the potential for armed regime change – with good cause considering it, along with Syria and Iraq, was on the neocon shortlist for shock and awe treatment in the early years of the Bush administration, to say nothing of continued war-drum beating by influential policymakers and pundits to this day. Second, Khamenei and other senior clerics and political leaders have been quite vocal in the assertion that nuclear weapons are against Islamic principles, and should not be developed. So no need to walk that back if they remain on the brink only.
If that is, indeed, Iran’s intention, then it sure does take the wind out of the sails of the good ship preventitive airstrikes, doesn’t it? After all, the main arguments in favor of airstrikes are based on Israel’s fear of a nuclear attack (without a weapon, and with a deterrent rather than aggressive posture, this fear is assuaged), the trepidation surrounding a possible regional arms race (it would be interesting to see if a virtual deterrent race arises, which would be less worrisome, though not completely innocuous) and the notion that a nuclear armed Iran would partake in foreign policy adventurism, seeking to assert dominance in the Gulf (again, without an actual arsenal, this threat is neutered).
Given that, I expect those urging on a military conflict will simply disregard the findings of the NIE Annual Threat Assessment.
Related posts:
The problem is, though, if they want the capability to produce nuclear weapons, there’s no way we can distinguish that from actually producing the weapons as their goal.
We know what Japan is doing because we talk to them and what they say is reasonably consistent.
But we don’t know what Iran is doing.
All that said, the idea that Iran would attack Israel with a single bomb is silly. And the idea we wouldn’t have some indication that they’re close to a bomb is silly, too.
I agree on all counts Cheryl.
Ugh. By the way, Spencer Ackerman just pointed out that this wasn’t the new NIE, but rather a recent Annual Threat Assessment.