Weighing the Consequences on Iran

On the radar: Saber-rattling from Iran and Israel; Rep. Rogers on bringing Iran to the table; the Bronze standard; Russia’s posturing and planning; Getting nukes out of Europe; the Politics keeping them in; Confidence and political will; and an Apocalypse-proof truck.

February 6, 2012 | Edited by Benjamin Loehrke and Mary Kaszynski

Risks of the military option - The New York Times editorial board on the risks of an Israeli strike: “It would likely only set Iran’s nuclear program back for a few years. It would unite Iranians around their government at a time when it is fast losing popular support. It would also shatter the international coalition for sanctions and direct more anger against Israel and the United States.”

--”American officials say they have counseled Israel on the need for patience and warned that a military attack could backfire. They need to keep pressing on both fronts,” the editorial concludes. ”Tough sanctions and a united diplomatic front are the best chance for crippling Iran’s nuclear program.” http://owl.li/8TUfo

Quote - “If Israel does a unilateral strike this could be a real problem for the national security interests of the United States,” said House intel committee chairman Rep. Mike Rogers (R-MI) on CNN’s State of the Union.

--”Our argument is can we work with the Israelis on this and other programs to try to delay or stop this program by bringing Iran to the table. That to me is a better outcome than inflaming the Middle East.” Eli Clifton at Think Progress has the story. http://owl.li/8TUhJ

Congrats to the New York Giants and condolences to Pats fans. Welcome to Early Warning - Subscribe to our morning email or follow us on twitter.

Bronze standard - Last month the administration notified Congress that nuclear trade deals will address enrichment and reprocessing on a “case-by-case” basis. The NYT editorial board explains why the new approach could have dangerous implications for nonproliferation efforts. http://owl.li/8TUDY

Event - Diplomatic Strategies for Preventing a Nuclear-Armed Iran, hosted by the Arms Control Association, features Ambassador James Dobbins, ACA’s Peter Crail, and Dr. Jim Walsh. Next Thursday, 9:30am, at the Stimson Center. RSVP here. http://owl.li/8Redv

Russian plans and exercises - “After two decades of military decline and costly regional wars, Russia is again investing in—and exercising—its strategic forces,” writes Marc Schanz for Air Force Magazine. Much like the U.S., Russia plans to revamp its nuclear arsenal over the next twenty years. Russia also has resumed strategic bomber patrols, bringing U.S. and allied air forces to resume scrambling jets to intercept them.

--”One indisputable purpose of Russia’s strategic exercises and nuclear revitalization is domestic political gain,” writes Schanz in his overview of Russia’s modernization plans and motivations. http://owl.li/8TUkj

Report argues take nukes out of Europe - “Global Zero calls for the United States and Russia to begin comprehensive nuclear arms negotiations in early 2013 to reduce their arsenals to as low as 1,000 total weapons each, and, as part of these negotiations, to pursue the expedited removal of all of their tactical nuclear weapons from combat bases on the European continent to national storage facilities in the United States and Russia.”

--Per the report’s recommendations, the US would withdraw its nonstrategic nuclear weapons to national facilities and Russia would move its weapons from operational bases in Europe to national storage facilities. Enhanced transparency and confidence building measures would accompany these actions. Full report here. (pdf) http://owl.li/8TUny

Politics keeping nukes in Europe - “Given that most experts believe these weapons are useless...this initiative ought to be pushing at an open door, but there is a lot of politics [in NATO and with Russia] conspiring to keep that door shut.” writes Julian Borger for The Guardian. http://owl.li/8TUqN

Event - New START at One Year: Implementation and Looking to the Future. Panel 1: Rose Gottemoeller, Ted Warner and Michael Elliott discuss how the treaty has worked thus far and next steps the U.S. government is considering. Panel 2: Steven Pifer, Jan Lodal and James Acton talk about future reductions and factors that could affect the process.

--Brookings Institution. Feb. 10 from 1:00-3:30pm. RSVP and details here. http://owl.li/8PKli

Presidential quote - Obama talked Iran, Israel, and the military option in an interview with NBC: "We are going to be sure that we work in lockstep as we proceed to try to solve this — hopefully diplomatically...Any kind of additional military activity inside the Gulf is disruptive and has a big effect on us. It could have a big effect on oil prices.” http://owl.li/8TUtz

Quote - “A military option will create a disaster in our region. So before that disaster, everybody must be serious in negotiations. We hope soon both sides will meet again but this time there will be a complete result...The technical disputes are not so big. The problem is mutual confidence and strong political will," said Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu in at the Munich Security Conference. http://owl.li/8TUzw

Reminder - Nuclear weapons can do to cities what, apparently, only your Chevy Silverado and Twinkies can survive. Here’s one of the best Super Bowl ads from last night. http://owl.li/8TWbs