Isolating Iran

On the radar: Pulling diplomats, pushing sanctions; Dangers of isolation; Turner says $214 billion; Markey says he’s undercounting; Sanchez on BMD budgets/oversight; Russia tying summits and supplies to BMD; Hibbs on engaging Iran; and Boot on bombing Iran.

December 1, 2011 | Edited by Benjamin Loehrke and Mary Kaszynski

Isolating Iran - “Iran sank into deeper isolation from the West on Wednesday, with Britain pulling out all of its diplomats and U.S. officials pushing for the European Union to take a tough line against Tehran during a crucial meeting planned for Thursday.” Thomas Erdbrink and Joby Warrick report for the Washington Post. http://owl.li/7LeWM

Dangers of isolation - “The Islamic Republic of Iran is now more isolated than it has been since the 1980s, but it also has a greater capacity to respond in ways that could disrupt the world economy - affecting the price and supply of oil, for example,” writes Barbara Slavin. “It is becoming harder to talk to Iran at a time when dialogue is more important than ever.”

-- "We ought to be worried about a spiral getting out of control on both sides," Paul Pillar notes. In Iran and its adversaries, "there is so much resignation to perceived unmitigated hostility on the other side that it is hard to see a way out." http://owl.li/7Lf0A

Welcome to Early Warning - Subscribe to our morning email or follow us on twitter.

Turner letter - Following yesterday’s Post article disputing the size of the nuclear weapons budget, Rep. Michael Turner (R-OH) wrote a letter to Rep. Ed Markey (D-MA) on the topic. Rep. Turner argues that “The correct figure is approximately $21.4 billion per year, or $214 billion over the next ten years,” and that Rep. Markey should issue a correction. http://owl.li/7Legq

Markey reply - Rep. Markey says Turner is “undercounting of the costs associated with building, operating and maintaining the nation’s nuclear arsenal.”

--“Instead of having a real debate about what weapons America really needs in the 21st century, Congressman Turner is wasting time questioning estimates of how much the gold-plated nuclear weapons complex is costing our country. Defense and budget leaders alike agree that the nuclear weapons budget needs to be a target for budget cuts or our federal debt will continue to be the greatest national security threat America faces.” http://owl.li/7Leoj

Tweet - CATO’s Chris Preble (@capreble), “The key take away is that we need a lot more transparency and accountability in what we spend on all weapons, including nukes. #factchecker”

EU sanctions update - EU leaders have imposed targeted financial sanctions on Iran, but failed to agree on an oil embargo, AP reports. http://owl.li/7Lf7Z

Sanchez on missile defense budgeting - “For missile defense, we must focus on proven missile defense technology against the most likely threats. In addition, we must preserve strategic stability as we deploy missile defenses against Iran and North Korea, and we must partner with allies for effective burden-sharing and providing a layered defense,” writes Rep. Loretta Sanchez (D-CA) in Roll Call.

--”We know, as the GAO has warned, that in the past, deficiencies in missile defense acquisition oversight have led to rework, cost increases, delays and doubts about delivered capabilities. In a tight budget environment and to ensure effective missile defense, we can no longer afford these lapses.” http://owl.li/7LfaR

Russia, summits, and BMD - “The Kremlin's intention to attend the summit ‘should not be taken as predetermined,’ Russian Foreign Ministry security and disarmament Deputy Director Vladimir Leontyev said. He emphasized, however, that the government was not taking off the table possible cooperation with NATO on missile defense, ITAR-Tass reported.” From Global Security Newswire. http://owl.li/7LffP

Russia, supply lines, and BMD - “Russia said it may not let NATO use its territory to supply troops in Afghanistan if the alliance doesn't seriously consider its objections to a U.S.-led missile shield for Europe, Russia's ambassador to NATO said Monday,” reports The Wall Street Journal.

--”NATO began shipping its supplies through Russia in 2009, after the so-called reset in relations between Moscow and the U.S., allowing the alliance a safer route for supplies into Afghanistan. But U.S.-Russian relations have been strained lately by the approach of elections in both countries.” http://owl.li/7Lfme

Positions and engagement with Iran - A negotiated solution to Iran’s nuclear program would need aligned interests between the US and its allies, Russia and China, Iran, and Israel. “In fact, none of them may have an interest in reaching such an outcome,” argues Mark Hibbs at Arms Control Wonk. Hibbs explains why through election politics, geopolitics, and murky Iranian politics. http://owl.li/7Lfqj

Boot’s Bottom Line on Iran - “The only credible option for significantly delaying the Iranian nuclear program would be a bombing campaign. But who imagines that President Obama will do what his predecessor wouldn't — namely, unleash a war against the ayatollahs? The use of force, despite the bluster from Washington about "all options" being "on the table," is not a credible threat (except from Israel), and the mullahs know it,” writes conservative thinker Max Boot in the LA Times.