The basic points I made was that Iran is making advances in its nuclear program, but that they were also being careful about ensuring that they did not cross the Israeli (and presumably American) redlines, defined broadly as enough 20% enriched uranium for one bomb (240 kgs). I am also skeptical Waltz's argument that Iran going nuclear would not necessarily be destabilizing for the region, especially considering the South Asian experience, where Pakistan has used its nuclear shield to prevent India responding to its repeated support for terrorism against India.
Saturday, February 23, 2013
On Iran's Nukes
I made a presentation about Iran's nuclear weapons program and its likely consequences at IDSA's annual Asian Security Conference. IDSA has now posted a video of my presentation.
The basic points I made was that Iran is making advances in its nuclear program, but that they were also being careful about ensuring that they did not cross the Israeli (and presumably American) redlines, defined broadly as enough 20% enriched uranium for one bomb (240 kgs). I am also skeptical Waltz's argument that Iran going nuclear would not necessarily be destabilizing for the region, especially considering the South Asian experience, where Pakistan has used its nuclear shield to prevent India responding to its repeated support for terrorism against India.
The basic points I made was that Iran is making advances in its nuclear program, but that they were also being careful about ensuring that they did not cross the Israeli (and presumably American) redlines, defined broadly as enough 20% enriched uranium for one bomb (240 kgs). I am also skeptical Waltz's argument that Iran going nuclear would not necessarily be destabilizing for the region, especially considering the South Asian experience, where Pakistan has used its nuclear shield to prevent India responding to its repeated support for terrorism against India.
