Additional Resources
Top Commentators:
- Elliott Abrams
- Fouad Ajami
- Shlomo Avineri
- Benny Avni
- Alan Dershowitz
- Jackson Diehl
- Dore Gold
- Daniel Gordis
- Tom Gross
- Jonathan Halevy
- David Ignatius
- Pinchas Inbari
- Jeff Jacoby
- Efraim Karsh
- Mordechai Kedar
- Charles Krauthammer
- Emily Landau
- David Makovsky
- Aaron David Miller
- Benny Morris
- Jacques Neriah
- Marty Peretz
- Melanie Phillips
- Daniel Pipes
- Harold Rhode
- Gary Rosenblatt
- Jennifer Rubin
- David Schenkar
- Shimon Shapira
- Jonathan Spyer
- Gerald Steinberg
- Bret Stephens
- Amir Taheri
- Josh Teitelbaum
- Khaled Abu Toameh
- Jonathan Tobin
- Michael Totten
- Michael Young
- Mort Zuckerman
Think Tanks:
- American Enterprise Institute
- Brookings Institution
- Center for Security Policy
- Council on Foreign Relations
- Heritage Foundation
- Hudson Institute
- Institute for Contemporary Affairs
- Institute for Counter-Terrorism
- Institute for Global Jewish Affairs
- Institute for National Security Studies
- Institute for Science and Intl. Security
- Intelligence and Terrorism Information Center
- Investigative Project
- Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs
- RAND Corporation
- Saban Center for Middle East Policy
- Shalem Center
- Washington Institute for Near East Policy
Media:
- CAMERA
- Daily Alert
- Jewish Political Studies Review
- MEMRI
- NGO Monitor
- Palestinian Media Watch
- The Israel Project
- YouTube
Government:
Back
(Washington Post) James M. Lindsay and Ray Takeyh - The rationale for the Iranian nuclear program has changed over time. Today, as Iranian hawks consolidate their power and the Revolutionary Guards emerge as a key pillar of the state, Tehran views nuclear weapons as the means to regional preeminence. A nuclear shield would give Iran freedom to project its power in the Middle East. Such an Iran is unlikely to be subtle about brandishing the nuclear card. An emboldened Iran would test Washington in several ways. It would probably lend more support to Hizbullah and Hamas and encourage them to act more aggressively against Israel. It might step up subversive activities against the Gulf sheikdoms and demand that they evict U.S. troops from their territory. A nuclear Iran could also be tempted to transfer nuclear materials and technologies to other countries. Or give fissile material to a terrorist group. If Tehran remains determined to go nuclear and preventive attacks prove too risky or unworkable to carry out, the U.S. will need to formulate a strategy to contain Iran. In doing so, however, it would be a mistake to assume that containment would save the U.S. from the need to make tough choices about retaliation. If Washington is not prepared to back up a containment strategy with force, the damage created by Iran's going nuclear could become catastrophic. James M. Lindsay is senior vice president and Ray Takeyh is a senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations.2010-02-22 07:51:45Full Article
The Force Needed to Contain Iran
(Washington Post) James M. Lindsay and Ray Takeyh - The rationale for the Iranian nuclear program has changed over time. Today, as Iranian hawks consolidate their power and the Revolutionary Guards emerge as a key pillar of the state, Tehran views nuclear weapons as the means to regional preeminence. A nuclear shield would give Iran freedom to project its power in the Middle East. Such an Iran is unlikely to be subtle about brandishing the nuclear card. An emboldened Iran would test Washington in several ways. It would probably lend more support to Hizbullah and Hamas and encourage them to act more aggressively against Israel. It might step up subversive activities against the Gulf sheikdoms and demand that they evict U.S. troops from their territory. A nuclear Iran could also be tempted to transfer nuclear materials and technologies to other countries. Or give fissile material to a terrorist group. If Tehran remains determined to go nuclear and preventive attacks prove too risky or unworkable to carry out, the U.S. will need to formulate a strategy to contain Iran. In doing so, however, it would be a mistake to assume that containment would save the U.S. from the need to make tough choices about retaliation. If Washington is not prepared to back up a containment strategy with force, the damage created by Iran's going nuclear could become catastrophic. James M. Lindsay is senior vice president and Ray Takeyh is a senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations.2010-02-22 07:51:45Full Article
Search Daily Alert
Search:
|