Iran: Crisis Point
We must take decisive action against Iran’s nuclear programme and take it quickly says Mohsin Zeb
As Iran nears its nuclear ambition, the consequences of a nuclear Iran become increasingly clear. It is not a pretty picture, concerns about an Iranian nuclear arsenal spread far and wide. Beyond the usual suspects of the United States of America, Great Britain in the role of sidekick and Israel, who considers itself the most likely victim of any future Iranian nuclear stockpile, the states in Iran’s region especially those on the Arab peninsula, appear to be equally nervous. Indeed, the reality is that the establishment of an Iranian nuclear arsenal will spur on regional and global nuclear proliferation that would further exacerbate the global risks spanning from unchecked nuclear proliferation.
Saudi Arabia has already publicly stated that it will pursue nuclear weapons if Tehran accomplishes its objectives in that field. No less a figure then Prince Turk al Faisal, a senior member of the Royal Family, stated a completed Iranian nuclear device would “would compel Saudi Arabia … to pursue policies which could lead to untold and possibly dramatic consequences”. He went on to clarify what such dramatic steps would be undertaken, eliminating any doubt that if Iran obtained nuclear weapons, proliferation in the already volatile Middle East would become inevitable. He stated, “We cannot live in a situation where Iran has nuclear weapons and we don’t. It’s as simple as that. If Iran develops a nuclear weapon, that will be unacceptable to us and we will have to follow suit.” The world can rest assured that if Iran goes nuclear, Saudi Arabia will not stand still. Should Riyadh join the nuclear club, the pressure on Cairo and Ankara to keep pace with their regional competitors will be immense. Thus suddenly nuclear weapons would have made a presence across the region, throwing gasoline onto a region that is explosive enough as it is.
As to how the Saudis will go about establishing a nuclear arsenal to provide a shield against a belligerent Tehran, there is a considerable body of opinion that believes Riyadh has already made moves to such affects via its long standing and intimate ally, Pakistan. Consider the 2011 report “Pakistan’s Nuclear Forces 2011” from the Federation of American Scientists. It reports that Pakistan will have 150-200 nuclear warheads by the end of this decade. This represents a huge expansion of Islamabad’s arsenal and a move beyond minimum credible deterrence vis-à-vis India. Coupled with the expansion of its nuclear infrastructure including new, more potent reactors, new plutonium reprocessing facilities and ever-evolving missile stockpile, it is clear Pakistan is working towards some objective. As it is difficult to identify strategic rivals or enemies beyond India, the question must be asked, why is Islamabad churning out nuclear warheads at a rate that will make it the worlds fourth or fifth biggest nuclear power by 2020?
I am not accusing Pakistan of meeting Saudi nuclear orders, but merely pointing out that such a scenario has been gamed by many analysts who note the developments in Pakistan quizzically. Indeed globally reputable publications such as the Guardian, Die Spiegel and the Washington Times have hinted at such conclusions. What is not a matter of speculation, but rather cold, hard facts is that Riyadh has been tremendously generous to Pakistan over the years and eased many financial tough spots for Islamabad. This financing has extended to cover military issues. Undoubtedly, Riyadh will want some return on those billions.
It seems that Saudi Arabia has taken some tentative steps to ensure itself against a nuclear Iran, primarily through some sort of nuclear pact with Pakistan. Indeed the notion of a nuclear pact that would see Pakistan cover the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia was first aired in 2003, when the Washington Post quoted a “ranking Pakistani insider”. Although both sides have denied it, time alone will tell the degree of cooperation reached between the two states. What is clear is that Saudi Arabia is not going to sit still to be under the eternal threat of Iranian nuclear arms.
Other regional actors too will be compelled to seek protection against a nuclear Iran. Israel has long-standing hostilities with Iran and may decide to act before Tehran crosses the threshold of weaponization. This is obviously the worse case scenario given that it would spark a regional conflict. As Israel is already an established nuclear power, this does not represent a proliferation risk. Others who may however feel compelled to seek protection by establishing their own nuclear stockpiles include Egypt and Turkey as already stated. Proliferation of the most lethal of arms to both countries would represent a dangerous breakdown in the global nuclear non-proliferation order and bring such weapons to North Africa and to the borders of Europe, a wholly unacceptable development. I find it hard to imagine a world where Iran, Saudi Arabia and Israel possess nuclear weapons sitting well with Cairo and Ankara if they are to be without. The only conclusion one can reach is that Iran and the Iranian case represents the most delicate card in the pack. Should it go nuclear, the entire non-proliferation regime is at genuine risk of collapse.
Thus it is imperative that Tehran be stopped. The safety of the greater Middle East and by extension the wider world is at risk should Tehran develop a nuclear sabre by which to threaten the safety of regional states. As talks and diplomatic manoeuvres appear to have failed to stall Iran’s nuclear drive, the time has come for a final ultimatum. Either Tehran abandons its reckless policy of nuclear proliferation or it faces targeted strikes to key facilities. The global nuclear non-proliferation regime rests on its enforcement here; this is a fulcrum in time that may well decide the trajectory for the future of the NPT and regime. Should it fail, a near half-century of progress may be lost as other states will too seek the most lethal of weapons to ensure their own security.
The global community is widely in agreement on this. The states of Europe and the US, the Arab league and many others all agree that a nuclear Iran is a global security catastrophe. Time then for a coalition to be brought together to enforce our collective right to a safe world by putting an end to Tehran’s program. Whilst we’re at it, regime change wouldn’t be so bad either. The progressive Iran of the Shah was a pillar of regional stability, and undoubtedly anything is better then the oppressive regime running Tehran now.
Failure to act today will mean we pass a far more dangerous world on to our children. No one wants that.
Author: Mohsin Zeb
Loading ...
4:16 pm
badman article still..
As nefarious as a nuclear Iran may be it is hard to practically persuade them to dearm when Israel & other similarly wasteman nations have them. The iranin leadership is dubious and Mr Inijad is a weird demagogic character, seeming more fictional than real-like that Chavez.Any attack on Iran will have a global impact and be viewed as an attack on Islam…
4:27 pm
Must disagree. Iran has little support amongst Muslim nations. It is a Shia expansionist state and is viewed as an aggressor by the Gulf states.
Israel has its problems, but I dont see a nuclear Iran being a solution.
4:37 pm
I am not a fan of Iran but what’s good for the goose is good for the gander. Why shouldn’t Turkey and Saudi Arabia have nukes?
5:43 pm
In light of the Iranian threat, both states have valid reasons to be scared. In broader terms, Turkey faces no serious security threats and therefore has no need for nukes. KSA faces Iran but lacks the sci-tech foundation to develop indigenous nuclear weapons. As stated, the Pakistan angle is central to any KSA procurement.
5:30 pm
I’ve not followed this story closely at all recently, but is there any definitive proof yet that Iran is trying to get nuclear weapons?
5:55 pm
The majority of the world suspects Tehran to be pursuing WMDs and I write from that perspective. Certainly Iran’s unwillingness to subject itself to checks and IAEA clearances, as well as its decision to enrich uranium beyond energy reactor levels is suspicious behaviour.
5:56 pm
Tony, here is a link.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/8510451.stm
5:59 pm
Iran is not Iraq, you can come any time you like but we will sent all your soldiers back in bodybags. If anyone was going to attack Iran it would have been Bush, but there is one country on earth they don’t dare messing with. Iran is safe because US cannot take such major defeat.
6:06 pm
Hi Kerman,
Whilst I have every bit of respect for the Iranian people and culture, this regime is both belligerent and a global security threat. It has made claims to Bahrain and has threatened all its neighbours. Thus, they all feel insecure. Instability in the oil rich ME is a direct danger to Western economic prosperity and this is unacceptable.
I direct you to a paper by Karl Rove who states that whilst the west can essentially accept a nuclear Pakistan, Iran is not going to be allowed to possess such weapons. The reason is simple: Odd dispute aside, Pakistan doesnt oppose the US in geo-strategic terms. They dont always see eye to eye, but there is no danger to US interests from a nuclear Pakistan. The two states have treaties going back to the Eisenhower era. Iran must learn that the Shah of the Gulf is Washington.
6:24 pm
Governments of KSA, UAE, Kuwait, Bahrain, Jordan, Qatar, Oman, Yemen and West Bank are traitors who have sold out their own people for American money. These American stooges don’t represent what the people in the region treally want, they represent purely American and Israeli interests, which is bad intentions.
Iran is the leader of the independent movement of the Middle East, we were the first to rid ourselves of the shackles of the colonialists and only wan to help others achieve this.
Now you may be the kind of guy to bow his head to opressors and let them kick you around, but we Iranians are not like that. You want us to accept the US is the Shah of our Persian Gulf? Well hell no. Instead we will make sure that there will be no American bases left in the Middle East. We are brave people, so let them make their threats. The wel being of our brothers in Bahrain, Iraq, Yemen, Palestine and Lebanon is more important than neo-colonialist interests to controll our Muslim oil for their economic prosperity.
The American Empire may not wan to see us with nuclear weapons, they have always tried to sabotage Iran’s development, however it’s a sad day for Karl Rove and all the other neo-cons, because there is nothing they can do about it. Iran will acquire nuclear weapons and it will be good for everyone, because it will deter the real security threat to the region: US and Israel which keep attacking everyone (unlike Iran which has not attacked another country in hundreds of years) and the Muslim world will finally have a real power to represent it.
7:10 pm
I kowtow to no man, nor any institution. I do however have a professional and academic interest in geostrategic affairs. Further, I have a personal desire to see a safe and secure KSA. Iran has clearly caused great fear in KSA and this extends through the region.
Thus the solution is simple. To preserve regional peace, Iran must be stopped.
7:15 pm
Wahabis want to mess with Iran, then fine. Bring it, let’s see how it works out for you.
Regional stability can only be achieved once we rid ourselfes of all these American stooges. As always, we Iranians have showed the way to go, it is in everyone else’s interests to follow.
7:21 pm
I am not a Wahabbi. I do however have to oppose this expansionist regime in Tehran that is causing such havoc in the region. No one feels safe with Iran at the moment and it is collectively desirable if its nuclear program is checked.
No one wants an iota of harm to the Iranian people, but Ahmedinejad and co seem hell bent on causing regional trouble.
6:59 pm
I think there are several factors here. Firstly, it is gross western arrogance to assume that only the Western powers are civilised and responsible enough to have nuclear weapons without them posing a threat. Though this statement may not be stated outright, many of these theories work on this basic presupposition. Nothing has given evidence to support the claim that Iran will incontrovertibly make use of nuclear weapons in an aggressive manner.
Secondly, and more importantly, Japan should also have nuclear weapon, especially considering the ever-expanding threat of an ever aggressive China. Historically, Japan has always been superior, even in 1592 when Taiko Hideyoshi Toyotomi attacked Korea, China sent 100,000 troops to defend Korea, and still Japan beat them convincingly, even a Chinese general was forced to admit that ‘simply put, Japanese military arts, and Japanese swordsmanshp is superior to our own.’ For a full account read Stephen Turnbull’s plethora of books. This should once again become the status quo, but the need for Japan to defend her and the Yamato line is imperative. People may say, but Japan has a recent aggressive military past and it would be dangerous to allow them to re-militarise. However, this aggression was a poor interpretation and deliberate defiling of the great work on the codification of Bushido by Taira Shigesuke called the Bushido Shoshinshu. In the modern context there is no threat.
Besides, if everyone has nukes, then it will be a balance of power, as no one will be willing to use them, due to the horrific outcome.
Arigato!
Sayonara!
7:04 pm
Ah the Japanese. They are a proud people, a warrior race if ever there has been one. Should any state have nuclear weapons, why not Japan. I agree. Perhaps the natural order of East Asia is rule by Japan.
Great food btw. I have come to love Sushi.
7:43 pm
Regional trouble is not caused by Iran, it is caused by the constant American interfearance. US always supports losers and although they always claim to have public backing it is evident from the realities on the ground that their side is always weaker and less populair, becaue they always go against the will of the people.
All that we Iranians have done is try help our brothers out. We have supported both Shi’a Lebanese and Iraqis and Sunni Palestinians and Afghans.
Stability will not come from wars against popular movements and constnatly going againt the grain. Stability will come when the yankees go home and leave the people of the Middle East to sort their own issues out.
And speaking of instability, tell me with a straight face Iran causes more instability than Saudi Arabia. Which country did the 9/11 hijackers come from? Which country do all these jihadists nutjobs and suicide bombers come from? What’s the homeland of bin Laden? Where do they execute minorities for being “infidels” and treat women like 6th century slaves? Which country provides vast majority of all finances for global terrorism? Not a day goes by without a Wahabi or Salafi blowing himself up and killing innocent people, because they consider everyone who doesn’t share their bent religious views as a infidel, and you are pointing fingers at Iran!?
7:49 pm
This article is extremely interesting. I reject the premise that Iran is belligerent but accept the Saudis etc are afraid.
As for ‘western’, I support the view that a person who is born in a country is of that land. You truly are exposed as racist. I was born in Brooklyn- am I not as American as someone with white skin simply on account of being brown?
7:54 pm
Rar, waa gwan….
look yeah Kerman-the evil, kufr shia state of iran does nothing but create fitna in the Islamic world-as the deviant, evil shia have done throughout history-bunch of wasteman. Though the Wahabi fitna is dubious it is nothing compared to the acts of the shia who disrespect and abuse hazrat abu bakr al siddiqie, hazrat umar etc-dizzie blood????
japan, japan-love their av but giveng them nukes…nah low dat…1500 whatever yeah-its 2012…there too busy on the ps3…their gash are fine doe…
8:00 pm
Ah the Japanese, indeed. It would stir the pot nicely if they had nukes.
Shia Iran must never be allowed WMDs.
8:10 pm
The battle of Karbala is a long time ago now, you want to start a new secterian war, please do, let’s see how that works out for you. We won in Baghdad, we won in Beirut, we won in Sa’adah and there is no Sunni army which can defeat the Shi’a today. But still we Iranians see you as our brothers and that’s why the Shi’a governments of Iran and Syria are the only ones doing something to help the Palestians, which have been totally abandoned by sell-out Sunni leaders.
This secterian hatred is nr.1 weapon for Zionists agianst us, you want to be their proxy? You will be defeated, I warn you. Which Sunni country can attack Iran? No-one!
8:47 pm
FTR, in a war Turkey and Pakistan would spark Iran. Pakistan with nukes and Turkey via a much much stronger conventional force.
8:59 pm
Pakistan is falling apart as we speak, not only can you not fight Iran, you cannot fight a few thousand talibs and as for Turkey, we’ve defeated the Turks many times in the past and can do it again.
Both countries are at war with themselfes, Pakistan with the Baluchis and the Talebs, Turkey with the Kurds. Iran doesn’t need to even fire one bullet to totally rip these two countries to pieces. That’s why you see both Erdo and Zardari coming to Iran sucking up to us.
9:25 pm
Please tell me what defence Iran has against 100-120 nuclear warheads?
Thought so.
9:32 pm
LOL. Check mate.
8:29 pm
Actually ‘Western’ I live in the PRC. Iran is a shia state & shia’s at best are wayward and many extreme shia are kafir-so put that in Khomenini’s turban and smoke it
shaytan. No shia/kufr state should ever have nukes…
Yes, I do have a predilection for hiphop culture and have album sales which reach the 1000s, you have 24 hour marriages and really poor banana boat English…
thank you, come again…
8:32 pm
It is hilarious he chose the name ‘western’, attacked me for using “we” [he totally misunderstood the sentence structure] despite me being born and raised here. Then attacked Pakistan whilst being a no-land claiming JJC.
9:03 pm
While Pakistan is being bombed by America every single day, hundreds of civilian Pakistanis being killed every day and your government is cowering in the face of these violations, Iran is leeding the Islamic world and all it’s struggles. You are best served to join us, follow our path, it’s better than being a Zionist stooge, because they want Sunnis and Shi’as to fight so that they are safe.
9:13 pm
Your government? I voted for David Cameron.
I support drone attacks against Islamist targets in NW Pakistan. May freedom spring forth in that land soon.
9:15 pm
You support violations of Pakistani souvereignity which kills 600-700 civilians every year? What a noble cause to support.
9:23 pm
If half that total are terrorists, its worth it. Terror must be given no quarter. Which is why Iran must be brought to book.
9:42 pm
Exactly. People like Kerman dont understand that a strata of Pakistani people support the US and the government of Pakistan in fighting Islamist radicalism.
10:19 pm
Majority of Pakistanis oppose the US violations of their country’s souvereignity and the way their sell-out government is destroying their country by fighting someone else’s war.
9:33 pm
Western – I am Japanese – from the land of the rising sun, and it is obvious that you are not ‘western’ at all. Your grammatical errors and lack of syntactic comprehensions are proof thereof, and this is coming from a Japanese person, whose people struggle with English at the best of times.
Pakistan is at least sacrificing its honourable soldiers for the sake of their country – a noble death, worthy of song and story. Yes, they are fighting ‘shinogi no kezzutte’ or ‘fighting on the ridgeline’, in other words it is a difficult task, but they will overcome!
9:50 pm
This is such a secterian blog, behind a thin veil of lies about democracy and stability lay purely secterian motives based on hatred of Shi’as. Both this article and the article about Syria along with the reactions under it, proves it.
But Iran is not going to be attacked, nobody has the balls to do it. So dream on…
10:10 pm
I’m sorry you feel this way young man. I take the feelings of my fans seriously. As it is, you are way off the mark. I am a champion of human rights, liberty and freedom. Any opposition to Iran is grounded in those factors.
Shia or Sunni, I care not when it comes to stability of the world. As it is, you have been belligerent like the state of Iran. Still, I greet you in peace.
May the force be with you.
10:17 pm
You call yourself a champion of human rights, yet you are concerned for the stability of the Wahabi regime in Riyad?
As it is you have the state of Iran not wanting to be a American colony. What should happen is not that Iran get’s invaded, but that the US pulls back from the wohle region and let’s all these unpopulair regimes which they are propping up, fall at hands of their own people.
10:33 pm
Kerm, as my hair has gotten grey, I have come to learn things about life. One is that it is not possible to tick every box desired. The Saudi regime isnt perfect, but it is a stable partner and a reliable ally. Thus, in the grand scheme of things, it is ok.
Human rights are the new gold standard.
10:09 pm
Im gonna keep it real now like and be deeper than farrakhan so all you should listen. Attention. Much as i admire the author of this article i have to disagree with his basic argument. Even if Iran does get nukes so what? The biggest danger to the middle east is the usa and its expansionist dreams along with Israel. As for the saudis though i love the sacred land of Hijaz the royal family are Wahabis and vultures. Id like to see Sunni rule over the Holy Land again. As for the Iranian mullahs they have done an admirable job of making their country no ones stooge. Its a lesson Pakistan could do well to follow. Sadly our political leaders are uncle toms. Real leaders like Sayyid Zaid Hamid are the need of the hour and the US is a fair weather friend only. At the same time the heretical Rafidi Shias have always stabbed Sunnis in the back and so cannot be fully trusted which is why it is necessary for Turkey and Egypt and Morocco to get nukes too but i do support the idea of a pan Islamic union modelled on the EÛ which includes the Shias of Iran.
Japan also has the right to nukes as does Germany. Why should only white might be right?
Iran does oppress Sunnis though. Still i have great respec for farsi culture and literature and its a great irony that all of the great Iranian poets have been Sunni sufis like ferdowsi hafiz rumi jami attar and sadi as well as others like ghazali and al-jilani etc,
1:28 pm
Dear Brother Baines, you cannot be serious. Zaid Hamid and co are clowns, conspiracy theorists like many on the right of their respective societies. That fool thinks America caused the recent floods in Pakistan. I could wager a pretty penny that it was heavy rains that caused it together with poor flood defences.
Further, the Pakistani people have had amble opportunities to elect mullahs. They dont. The MAA got about 3% of the vote or something in elections external observers called ‘broadly free and fair’. They do not want Islamist ruling over them and undermining their civil and political rights.
Finally as to the nuclear question, it’s not a race issue. Germany has rejected such arms post WW2, and Morocco has neither the funds nor technical skills to create them. Turkey could and perhaps should, but that the NPR includes nearly all countries across race and faith lines means its really an issue of security and nothing else.
1:51 pm
Bains,
Fam, Farrakhan thinks we are all descendent of an alien species. Worse, Zaid Hamid not only holds the view that 9/11 was an ‘inside job’ but worse and somewhat funnier still thinks India was responsible for the floods in Pakistan.Hamid is merely a south asian David Icke-he is a complete and utter conspiracy theorist moron. The Saudi regime does have salafi leanings but in juxtaposition to the shi’tes is a lesser evil…(interesting if we remove the comma the English word spelt sums up that sect-tee-hee!!)
The Iranian regime is a shi’te entity and history knows how they have polluted the ummah. Yes Iran has a great tradition of literature & many great sunni scholars heralded from there-which makes it sadder that the reality of this rogue state is so heinous today.
8:24 pm
Pakistan has friends? Which friends? Pakistan sold it’s friends in 2001, now they are alligned with a country that doesn’t care one bit about it and that’s the reasonw why they are in so much trouble at the moment. US is destroying Pakistan for it’s own benefit, very good “Friends”.
8:24 pm
I have damaged nothing.
8:26 pm
Sorry buddy, but Pakistan has close friends in China, Turkey and Saudi Arabia. Who likes Iran?
Plus arent you Kurdish? You dont even have a country you vagabond.
8:32 pm
Karl Rove disagrees.
9:04 pm
And Karl Rove was a great succes wasn’t he? Bush went down as worst US President ever, simply by following Rove’s strategies.
9:01 pm
Those are not friends, they are vultures.
9:15 pm
They are tried and tested friends. Brothers so to speak. I heard Kurdistan is nice this time of year…oh wait, no such country exists.
You people are like rats, scattering from one land to the next. Oh Saddam, how he kept you in place.
9:17 pm
Anyone is better then the Shia swine ruling Iran at the moment.
9:30 am
Supporter of liberty and democracy, prasing Saddam and king Abdullah… uh-hu
9:38 am
You claim you are not a Sunni secterianist, yet you call Shi’as swine.
Come attack Iran if you want to, we are not afraid of any such invasion. The question is, with which army? Britain can’t offord an army anymore, that’s why you had to merge with the French, Pakistan couldn’t even offord an army from the start and now US is cutting aid, that’s trouble. Besides if Pakistan’s army would attack Iran, the Taliban would walk into Islamabad and hang Zardari and Gillani, they can barely handle them now, how could they handle them in a war? Or what, you want Saudi Arabia to attack? That’s gonna be fun, seeing those princes which joined to have fun playing with American planes and tanks actually fight a war. LOL
Did you see the videos from Sa’dah last year? Seeing those Saudis run from the battlefield and abandon their commanders and weapons as soon as they are fired on, really makes us Iranians frightened.
You want Sunni Vs. Shi’a? Let’s see how that works out for you… Shi’a won in Baghdad 2006-2007, Shi’a won in Beirut 2008, we won in Sa’dah 2009-2010 and now can you guess who’s gonna win in Syria 2011?
Trust me, you don’t want it with Iran.
11:02 am
Kerm, you are young. You will learn in time the value of stability. As for Pakistan, it can afford an army. Did it disband its forces when sanctioned?
I reject as false accusations of sectarianism. This debate is about security.
10:03 pm
We want security, but we want to be secure while independent. Iran will be no Western colony. And look, if you compare Iran to Pakistan, who managed to create better internal security? Which country is more stable?
It’s because Iran’s policy of challenging the imperialists is good, and that is the way to go. Meanwhile the pro-American policies of Pakistan’s traitor government, which are not backed by the majority of it’s people, are a disaster which are destroying the country.
Iran is the way to go for stability and independence. It’s regimes like KSA, UAE and Bahrain which need to go.