Alex Massie Alex Massie

Deterring or Living With Iran?

Ross Douthat suggests that rather than look to US-Soviet relations, it might be more useful to recall how the world was terrified by the prospect of a nuclear China in the 1960s. There’s something to that and, equally, as Ross says the fact that deterrance worked with the USSR and China does not mean that it will always work again. As he puts it, a nuclear Iran is a serious “risk-multiplier”. That’s why it’s possible to be gravely concerned by the implications of a nuclear Iran while also being extremely reluctant to endorse the idea of pre-emptive military action.

Meanwhile, James writes:

Diplomacy, sanctions and a blockade should all be tried in an attempt to persuade Iran to give up its nuclear programme. But if it won’t, then the question comes down to which is worse: bombing Iran or a nuclear Iran. Alex says that nuclear Iran is undesirable but that we can live with the risk it represents. But I’m not so sure we can…

Firstly, I suspect that it is not so much a question of being able to “live with” a nuclear Iran but that, eventually, we will have little choice but to do so.

Secondly, I’m also unpersuaded by the choice James offers between bombing Iran and a nuclear Iran. Some commenters suggest that opposing attacking Iran means one must be comfortable with the idea of Tehran acquiring nuclear weapons. Not so! On the other hand, some advocates of military action seem quite blithely confident that bombing Iran will actually work. That doesn’t seem so very obvious to me. What if attacking Iran doesn’t work? And what’s the definition of success anyway?

Suppose – hypothetically – there’s a 50% chance of an attack setting Iran’s nuclear ambitions back by between two and five years.

Already a subscriber? Log in

Keep reading with a free trial

Subscribe and get your first month of online and app access for free. After that it’s just £1 a week.

There’s no commitment, you can cancel any time.

Or

Unlock more articles

REGISTER

Comments

Don't miss out

Join the conversation with other Spectator readers. Subscribe to leave a comment.

Already a subscriber? Log in