If Iran cannot be peacefully convinced to curtail its nuclear program, the president could soon be faced with a hugely consequential decision: attack Iran in an attempt to prevent it from acquiring nuclear weapons, or recognize that it could do so and embrace deterrence and containment instead. By staking American credibility on a policy of prevention at all costs, Obama may end up believing he has to choose war. But he would be wrong, because deterrence (threatening devastating retaliation) and containment (blunting the spread of Iranian power and influence) may in fact be more prudent than preventive attack.
Summer of Sanctions: Congress Plans New Iran Penalties
On the Center’s website, I’ve written a long piece on the new sanctions bills that the House and Senate will be considering in the next few months. Some of them are measures similar to what we’ve seen before, but there are also some new twists being mu…
Congress Plans Tough New Sanctions Amidst Widespread Skepticism
By Usha Sahay May 21, 2013 It’s getting hot and humid here in D.C., and it looks like we’re kicking off a long, hot summer of new Iran sanctions. On Wednesday, May 22, the House Foreign Affairs Committee will mark up the Nuclear Iran Prevention Act. The new bill expands already stringent sanctions on Iran […]
Could a nuclear-armed Iran be contained?
Published in the Bulletin of Atomic Scientists Online By Kingston Reif Article summary below; read the full text here. On September 4, 1962, President John F. Kennedy released a statement in response to intelligence reports of a Soviet arms buildup in Cuba. Kennedy said the United States did not have evidence “of the presence of […]
A Tale of Two Outliers: Comparing Options on Iran and North Korea
Over at LobeLog, I’ve published a piece exploring how the U.S. should deal with what Robert Litwak calls “nuclear outliers” – namely, Iran and North Korea. I argue that both countries present tough challenges for U.S. foreign policy as well as worldwid…
