Recent mysterious explosions at Irans nuclear facilities, which some have attributed to Israel, return to prominence a calculation not seriously considered since 2015: Irans dwindling breakout clock.
The ensuing damage might successfully turn back time on that clock. But if not, Israel might have to consider military action; a decision lent urgency by the looming American election.
The disastrous 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) emboldened Irans aggression and enabled its eventual nuclear capability. PresidentDonald Trumprightfully withdrew from the agreement and replaced it with amaximum pressure sanctions campaign, but Iran responded by attacking US and allied assets, and evidently has been accelerating its nuclear program.
The Trump administration ultimately responded to Irans aggression withan airstrikein January that killed Iranian GeneralQassem Suleimani, commander of the Quds Force and the mastermind behind Tehrans regional aggression.
However, the United States has had no answer to Iranian nuclear expansion. Having now reportedlyproduced enoughlow-enriched uranium for a nuclear weapon, with further enrichment, Iran could reach nuclear weapons capabilityin 3 to 4 months. This breakout window would shrink further if Iran installs advanced centrifuges.
Slowing Irans Nuclear Advance
Sanctionshavent slowed this nuclear advance. Neither will extending Irans arms embargo, expiring this October under the JCPOA, which the Trump administration should pursue regardless.
Only credible military threats have convinced Iran to postpone its nuclear ambitions, such as in 2003, after Americas toppled the Taliban and former Iraqi dictatorSaddam Hussein, and following Israeli Prime MinisterBenjamin Netanyahus literalred-line drawingat the United Nations in 2012, whichIran was careful not to cross.
Sabotage has proven effective at slowing Irans nuclear clock, too. Israel has reportedly pursued this strategy repeatedly, with the2009 Stuxnet cyberattack, the 2010-12killing of Iranian nuclear scientists, and now perhaps theexplosionstargeting Irans centrifuge construction facility. Covert disruption has the significant benefit of deniability and minimizing the risk of major retaliation.
With Irans nuclear clock once again ticking loudly, the question is whether sabotage will continue to buy time. Earlyreportssuggestthe explosionsat Irans Natanz Centrifuge Assembly Center set back Irans longer-term plans for an industrial nuclear program (to produce multiple nuclear bombs in short order), but it remains unclear if it also delayed Irans breakout time.
While the former is important, it is the latter that more likely determines if some time has been bought. If not, then Israel might not only consider further sabotage but another approach that could more significantly delay a nuclear Iran: overt military action.
Historically, Israel has conducted major military action when time leaves it no other alternative, such as itsstrikes on nuclear reactors in Iraqin 1981 and inSyria in 2007. Israel might be inclined to reserve this option until sabotage has proven no longer materially effective or an Iranian breakout seems imminent.
Looming US Elections
But there is another clock that might push Israel to act overtly sooner: the US political calendar.
American backing could be critical to mitigating the scope and intensity of Irans retaliation to an overt Israeli strike and subsequently pressing Iran not to renew its nuclear pursuit. Trump could well do just that; hereportedlyinstructed former National Security AdvisorJohn Boltonto tell Bibi [Netanyahu] that if he uses force, I will back him.
If Trump wins a second term, Israel might feel it has more time or it might worry that he will pursue anew deal with Iran.
IfJoe Bidenbecomes president, he likely will reengage PresidentBarack Obamas JCPOA and strongly oppose Israeli action, effectively taking the military option off the table until at least 2025.
Meanwhile, more JCPOA restrictions, including on advanced R&D and ballistic missiles, will lapse by the end of the next presidents term, bringing Iran too close to nuclear capability. Israel might find this risk unacceptable.
Thus, Israel might determine the next four months are its best opportunity to cripple Irans nuclear program a choice Trump might welcome as it would scramble the electoral picture. Alternatively, Israel could wait to see who wins the American election and decide what to do.
Israeli Action
Some American analysts contend that Israel lacks the capability or will to attack Iranian nuclear facilities overtly, or it would have done so already. Yet, we should heed the repeated assertations by senior Israeli military and political leaders of intent to strike militarily when necessary. History suggests that such action andIsraels national security, if not very existence necessitates it.
An overt Israeli strike on Iranian nuclear facilities would continue its growing role of rolling back the Iranian threat and advancing US interests. To support its partner, Washington should accelerate weapons deliveries that Israel needs for a military campaign and to blunt Iranian retaliation.
It is possible that if military action is required, the United States will act first. American presidents sinceBill Clintonhave pledged, inObamas 2009 words,to use all elements of American power to prevent Iran from developing a nuclear weapon.
If the United States, with its immense capabilities, does conduct military action, it is likely to inflict greater damage to Irans nuclear program and set it back further than Israel could, while reducing Tehrans will or capability to retaliate.
Yet, absent American action, or regime collapse in Tehran, Israel can be expected to conduct whatever covert or overt action is necessary to prevent a nuclear Iran.
full story here https://www.thedefensepost.com/2020/07/31/israel-action-iran/
Michael Makovskyis President and CEO of the Jewish Institute for National Security of America (JINSA).
Leave a Reply