[ad_1]
“The bottom line is that Iran’s nuclear programme has advanced pretty dramatically and with far less international oversight than at any point in its history since the US withdrawal from the JCPOA,” said Julien Barnes-Dacey, of the European Council on Foreign Relations.
“Effectively today everyone’s flying blind. In less than a year’s time, the world may well be contending with a nuclear Iran,” said Urban Coningham, of the Royal United Services Institute think tank on defence.
Five years after the JCPOA withdrawal and three years after Joe Biden’s attempts to renegotiate failed, he said there was “still no new methodology for engaging with Iran”.
What’s stopping Iran?
Tehran calculates that it stands to gain more in terms of sanctions relief and future negotiations by dangling the threat of the bomb than actually building it.
It has carefully cultivated a network of proxies such as Hezbollah and Hamas across the Middle East as part of a “forward defence” strategy to contain Israel.
Iranian officials have begun talking of their “deterrent”, jargon associated with nuclear bombs, and suggesting that they have the ability to build a bomb when they want to.
Weaponising would be dangerous. Far better instead to leverage the status of a threshold nuclear power.
Escalation carries significant risk to the regime, which explains why the April 13 attack was so clearly telegraphed and more performative than intent on serious damage.
But if Israel retaliates, Tehran could decide it needs the bomb for its own security and has already shown a taste for danger.
“While the recent Iranian attack was ultimately ineffective, it illustrates that the regime in Tehran is deeply reckless, and seemingly comfortable with the risk that one drone or missile strike could have hit a densely populated urban target and completely changed Israel’s response,” Mr Coningham said.
“Iran will pay a steep price for developing nuclear weapons, so it will not make that decision lightly,” Ms Davenport told The Telegraph.
She added: “Escalating tensions between Israel and Iran increases the risk of Tehran determining that nuclear weapons are necessary for its security, particularly if Israel responds to the April 13 attack with a counterstrike on Iranian territory.”
Mr Barnes-Dacey said: “The intelligence suggests they don’t want to weaponise at the moment but that could change on a dime.
“Iran could decide, particularly given the worsening regional situation, that actually ultimately a nuclear deterrent is precisely what it needs in the context of a more aggressive Israel and the prospect of Trump coming back into power.”
Axis of Putin and Trump
The prospect of Mr Trump winning November’s US elections is not the only factor in play in a complicated geopolitical picture that also involves Russia.
Vladimir Putin has deepened Russian ties with Iran since his illegal invasion of Ukraine made Moscow an international pariah, which risks emboldening Tehran.
[ad_2]
Source link
