Iran: Playing With Nuclear Fire

"Iran's Atomic Dilemma" writes Amir Taheri. "Stopping Iran's Atomic Quest" writes Canada's National Post in an editorial. Meanwhile, The Bulletin of Atomic Scientists says the window during which Iran could still be stopped is closing; some believe it may be as short as 6-9 months, and anecdotal evidence strengthens that suspicion.

This should be worrying, and not just to the folks in the White House. It should be profoundly worrying to the people of Iran.

Tyler Cowan explains "The Game Theory of Nuclear Proliferation," and why it's so dangerous. In addition to upping the risks of war with the USA, Iran's efforts also up the risk of catastrophe as a result of miscalculation between other nuclear powers - like Israel and Iran, for instance. I've made this point before... but Iranians need to understand the full implications. A regime that owns nuclear weapons directly threatens the personal safety of every Iranian in a way that simply hasn't been true before.

Mehrad Vaezinejad's brief summary of the situation to date is very good, and reader sashoyant's comment that some of these nuclear reactors are near major earthquake fault lines should make people worry all by itself. Ted Turner and Sam Nunn's Nuclear Threat Initiative foundation also has a set of worthwhile resources about Iran's weapons programs. Meanwhile, the news is not good re: Russian cooperation to stop Iran's efforts. Iran's refusal to stop uranium enrichment is the final signal that makes its intentions very clear. They will not stop until they have atomic bombs.

The Iranian regime is doing more than just playing with fire here. It is deliberately playing with the lives of every man, woman and child in Iran. As I noted in my comments re: Kaveh's article:

"These odds would be low, but they'd be there. And it could happen over something as stupid as an accident. Rafsanjani has (in a feat of amazing idiocy) already threatened to use Iranian weapons against Israel, and said he could accept their retaliation because Iran would die but Islam would live. That can't be ignored (and nor can this).

What it means is that Iranian possession of nuclear weapons forces Israel into a hair-trigger mode. Travel time for missiles is short, the country is very small, and so there is no margin for error. For Israel, it's "use them or lose them" once the alert is given.

Now, contemplate further that the USA and Soviet Union both had false alerts during the cold war. Neither pressed the trigger, because they both had countries large enough, and spread-out facilities secure enough, that they believed they could afford to wait and be sure. As I've noted, Israel does not have that luxury.

Imagine that one day the "Green Pine" radars of Israel pick up a set of Iranian missiles launching on a trajectory toward Israel. Let's imagine that this happens during a period of considerable tension for some other reason, so everyone is already on edge. Finally, let's imagine it's really a glitch of some kind, a mistake.

The Israelis now have minutes to decide - and if they decide the wrong way, we just kissed how many million Iranians goodbye (and most of Israel in the ensuing retaliation) for a software glitch? At that point, the excuse of "but having nuclear missiles made Iranians feel better, and gave us a sense of power" will be rather cold comfort, no?

Is a false sense of foolish pride really worth placing all Iranians under that risk?

Now, one may note that Israel has these weapons, why doesn't the same logic apply to them? Of course, it does. They have nuclear weapons because they believe, with good reason, that losing a war means their wholesale murder and destruction anyway. If you're already playing for annihilation stakes, nuclear weapons can't raise them any further. Pakistan, confronted by a hostile and nuclear-armed India on its border and a direct flashpoint for war in Kashmir, had a similar argument. In these cases, the risks inherent to a nuclear deterrent may indeed be seen as a lesser evil in the calculus of national security.

Iran is NOT playing for annihilation stakes. Even if it declared war on the U.S.A. it wouldn't be playing for those stakes. But if it gets nuclear weapons, it would be. This is hellishly dangerous.

I haven't even brought the U.S. reaction into play, or the possible response of Russia to having its own cities in range of Iranian missiles. On regional grounds alone, possession of nuclear arms by Iran endangers Iranians more than it makes them secure.

I see too many people treating these weapons like they're some kind of game, or an expensive toy like buying a Ferrari or something. It isn't just a game, and they aren't just toys. The only things being played with here are the lives of Iranians.

The only way to win that game, is not to play in the first place."

A regime that believes nuclear strikes on Iran are acceptable if Israel also perishes will not be deterred from this quest, which takes the logic of suicide terrorism and applies it with breathtaking megalomania at a national level. The key to creating a stable situation will lie instead with the Iranian middle. Right now, they see an Iranian A-bomb as a "national prestige" project worthy of support.

That belief needs to change into an understanding of the dangers Iranians are being exposed to, and the weakness of the case for doing so. Once more Iranians understand the truth, it will both speed up the end of the mullahs' regime and ensure a safer region for everyone in the years ahead. The West has levers at its disposal to communicate that message and to foster a strong, peaceful anti-nuclear movement in Iran, if we really wish to do so.

One wonders, too, where the global anti-nuclear movement is on this issue... or are nuclear weapons only bad in the hands of the United States, and fine in the hands of openly genocidal theocrats who also preach suicide and live in the 10th century?

Faster... and smarter, please. Time's running out.

UPDATE:

• Think a glitch can't cause armageddon? Perhaps you should talk to Lt. Col. Stanislav Petrov. Otherwise known as "the man who saved the world." For real.

• More comments and thoughts on the difference between Iran and USA-USSR or Pakistan, and why this particular situation is so structurally unstable, over in Hooman's comments section.

All rights reserved. This article can be found on the Internet at:

http://www.windsofchange.net/archives/iran_playing_with_nuclear_fire.php

Persons wishing to contact the author of this article for reprints etc. should put a request in the Comments section, or send an email to "joe", over here @windsofchange.net.