• IN THIS SECTION

July 10, 2008

Exclusive: The Doomsday Scenario – A Nuclear Iran?

KT McFarland

Throughout the Cold War, the Bulletin of Atomic Scientists kept a Doomsday Clock, monitoring how close they thought the world was to catastrophic nuclear destruction, measured as ‘minutes from midnight.' This week Iran tested its first nuclear-capable, long-range missile and moved the hands of the Doomsday Clock a little closer to disaster.

Why does a nuclear Iran pose such a unique threat? After all, we already have countries like Pakistan and North Korea in the ‘nuclear club' and while we may not like it, we don't think of it as catastrophic.

First, Iran has repeatedly declared its intention to wipe Israel off the face of the earth. Nuclear weapons turn that from mere braggadocio to a tangible capability. Second, if Persian Shiite Iran gets nuclear weapons, then Sunni, Arab Saudi Arabia will want its own nuclear arsenal to offset it. And Israel is already thought to have nuclear weapons. This would set off an arms race - a nuclear arms race - in the most unstable, volatile region in the world. Finally, a nuclear Iran will add muscle to its ambitions to dominate the Persian Gulf and threaten not only Israel, but any country within 1200 miles of Iran - which includes the oil producing countries of the Middle East, Turkey and parts of Europe. It would put Iran in the driver's seat in controlling the free flow of oil through the Straits of Hormuz.

And, as frightening as this all sounds, it isn't the worst that could happen. As we have seen when Israel bombed Iraq's Osirik nuclear facility in 1981 and Syria's fledgling nuclear reactor last fall, Israel will not tolerate nuclear weapons in the hands of its enemies. If Israel determines there is no other way to stop Iran's nuclear program, it will bomb those facilities. Some experts, including former US Ambassador to the UN John Bolton, believe an attack could come before the next president takes the oath of office in January 2009.

An Israeli raid would be complicated - it's over 1000 miles from Israel to Iran, and their planes would need permission to overfly Iraq, Saudi Arabia or Syria, refuel in the air and destroy several targets which are not only scattered throughout the country but also hardened. And even if successful, an Israeli attack would be unlikely to wipe out Iran's nuclear program.

What would happen next? Iran has already announced it would retaliate by attacking US and Israeli targets in the region and blockading the Straits of Hormuz, which would be considered an act of war against the United States. An Israeli attack on Iran, with or without American cooperation, would trigger an Iranian response which could turn the Middle East into a ‘fireball', according to UN nuclear weapons chief Mohammed El Baradei.

But wait - it gets worse. Forty percent of the world's oil goes through the Straits of Hormuz, which is just 21 miles wide with shipping lanes only two miles wide. Blockade, sabotage, terrorist incidents - all of these are possible and any of them could halt the flow of oil. Even if the Straits remain open in such a crisis, insurance rates would be prohibitive. Gas rationing would be a given, and $5 gallon a gas just a fond memory. The economies of several countries would literally collapse.

Is there any way out of this mess? Any glimmer of hope? Right now, not much. So far Iran has shown no interest in halting its nuclear weapons program. It has rebuffed UN and European proposals, it has not responded to economic and diplomatic sanctions. Certainly, aggressive diplomacy will be part of any solution, but so far Iran has been reluctant to engage.

Our financial leverage is slim, because Iran is rich with high oil revenues. Our diplomatic leverage is weak - the UN and others have been reluctant to take a tough and united stand against Iran. Our economic leverage hasn't been effective, because even if we slap increasingly severe sanctions on Iran, other countries don't follow suit.

However, this week former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger wrote an editorial describing signs that Russia might be ready for a new relationship with the United States, a possible strategic partnership to deal with a range of issues. On the top of the list is what to do about Iran and its nuclear ambitions; Russia is unlikely to want an aggressive, nuclear armed Iran sitting just across the Caspian Sea.

Kissinger is the most brilliant diplomat of the last 50 years - he negotiated the end of the Vietnam War, the US opening to China, US-Soviet arms control accords, and the first ever Middle East peace agreements. A US-Russian alliance? A long shot, maybe, but certainly intriguing. And, were it to work, formidable. Kissinger might just be on to something. For the sake of all of us, let's hope someone in Washington and Moscow is listening.

Family Security Matters Contributing Editor KT McFarland is a former top Pentagon official in the Reagan Administration and a frequent commentator on national security issues and foreign affairs. Feedback: editorialdirector@familysecuritymatters.org

Print This E-mail This

Share It: