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
(War on the Rocks) Michael Eisenstadt - President Obama has often stated, regarding Iran's potential nuclear weapons ambitions, that "we preserve all our capabilities...our military superiority stays in place." Further scrutiny, however, raises questions regarding whether political and military dynamics set in train by the nuclear deal with Iran will in fact make preventive military action even more problematic and, therefore, unlikely. The agreement will almost certainly enable Iran to strengthen its defenses and its retaliatory capabilities. In the next 10 to 20 years, Iran could more than double the size of its current inventory of about 800 short- and medium-range ballistic missiles. This will stress regional missile defenses and dramatically increase the size of an Iranian retaliatory strike. Moreover, Iran is free to continue its development and production of land attack cruise missiles, which are not addressed directly in the deal. Future underground facilities are likely to be located at sites that are even better protected and deeper than the current underground facilities at Natanz and Fordow. Fordow probably represents the outer limits of what America's current generation of conventional deep penetrator munitions ("bunker-busters") can take on. Iran has hundreds of underground bunkers and facilities that it could use for clandestine nuclear activities, playing a shell game with foreign intelligence services, which would have to determine which ones are being used for proscribed purposes. The nuclear deal with Iran could therefore complicate U.S. efforts to deter, detect, and prevent a future Iranian nuclear breakout, while buying Iran time to counter some of America's most potent capabilities. The writer is director of the Military and Security Studies Program at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy. 2015-09-01 00:00:00Full Article
How the Iran Deal Could Complicate U.S. Efforts to Prevent a Nuclear Breakout
(War on the Rocks) Michael Eisenstadt - President Obama has often stated, regarding Iran's potential nuclear weapons ambitions, that "we preserve all our capabilities...our military superiority stays in place." Further scrutiny, however, raises questions regarding whether political and military dynamics set in train by the nuclear deal with Iran will in fact make preventive military action even more problematic and, therefore, unlikely. The agreement will almost certainly enable Iran to strengthen its defenses and its retaliatory capabilities. In the next 10 to 20 years, Iran could more than double the size of its current inventory of about 800 short- and medium-range ballistic missiles. This will stress regional missile defenses and dramatically increase the size of an Iranian retaliatory strike. Moreover, Iran is free to continue its development and production of land attack cruise missiles, which are not addressed directly in the deal. Future underground facilities are likely to be located at sites that are even better protected and deeper than the current underground facilities at Natanz and Fordow. Fordow probably represents the outer limits of what America's current generation of conventional deep penetrator munitions ("bunker-busters") can take on. Iran has hundreds of underground bunkers and facilities that it could use for clandestine nuclear activities, playing a shell game with foreign intelligence services, which would have to determine which ones are being used for proscribed purposes. The nuclear deal with Iran could therefore complicate U.S. efforts to deter, detect, and prevent a future Iranian nuclear breakout, while buying Iran time to counter some of America's most potent capabilities. The writer is director of the Military and Security Studies Program at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy. 2015-09-01 00:00:00Full Article
Search Daily Alert
Search:
|