Iran is speeding up its weapons programs. What should the United States do?
“Unveiling ceremony of Khorramshahr-4 ballistic missile” by Ehsan Naderipour is licensed under CC BY 4.0
Since this piece was written, news broke that the Trump administration had sent Iran a letter stating that they had two months to reach a new nuclear accord. Although Iran has not yet responded, they have reiterated that they will not give in to threats.
The beginning of the second Trump administration has meant a whirlwind of policy changes, domestically and overseas, including a near about-face on American policy towards Russia. However, one thing has remained consistent: the threat from Iran. Even as Hamas and Israel fight over the terms of an unstable ceasefire, American intelligence shows that a group of Iranian scientists is attempting to develop a faster yet more primitive process for an atomic bomb. Since this intelligence was revealed, Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei rejected the idea of engaging in discussions with the United States, saying it was “not rational, intelligent, or honorable” to do so. With security in the Middle East remaining threatened, the United States and its partners must have a concrete plan for resolving the ever-present Iran threat. It may finally be time for a more permanent solution to the constant thorn in the West’s side.
American relations with Iran regarding nuclear weapons have been up and down over the last two decades. In May of 2006, Iran’s newly elected President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad sent a letter to President Bush seeking to propose “new ways” to end the nuclear dispute between the nations. The letter was dismissed as a negotiating ploy as Iran had just announced it had successfully managed to enrich uranium, a necessary component of nuclear weapon construction. Although American concerns over Iran’s nuclear program remained, in 2008 it was reported that the United States rejected an Israeli plan to bomb Iranian nuclear sites. Seven years later, Iran agreed to halt its nuclear program with the signing of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), a major breakthrough. However, during President Trump’s first term, relations in Iran quickly soured, and President Trump pulled out of the JCPOA in 2018. In May of 2019, during a sharp increase in tensions, Iran stated that it would soon restart enrichment of uranium. Both countries engaged in posturing; however, the next month, United States Secretary of State Mike Pompeo stated that the United States was “prepared to engage in a conversation with no preconditions.”
Tensions remained high through the remainder of the first Trump presidency, particularly after the American killing of General Qasem Soleimani, the head of the Iranian Revolutionary Guards' Quds Force. The beginning of the Biden presidency saw a turn towards cooperation between the two countries. In April 2021, a meeting with the member countries of the JCPOA was held, and although progress was reported, Iran and the United States remained out of the agreement. Relations in 2022 ebbed and flowed with both countries showing a willingness to negotiate at some moments and hostilities flaring up at others. Negotiations never continued, and the beginning of the war in Gaza involving multiple Iranian-backed groups only complicated things further.
As one can see, American interests in the Middle East have been aggravated by a complex and difficult adversary over the past 20 years. At some point something has to give, and now is the time for the United States to neutralize the Iranian nuclear threat. It is more likely now than ever that Iran would resort to a nuclear weapon. For one, it is likely that the time it would take Iran to create fissile material has decreased from months or years to a matter of weeks, although it would still take the country months to produce a capable warhead. The recent intelligence stating that Iran is pursuing even faster methods only serves to raise the stakes. Although it does not appear that Iran has currently decided to pursue the creation of a nuclear weapon, its October ballistic missile attack on Israel showed that its more conventional arms were nearly useless. Additionally, Iranian proxies like Hezbollah and Hamas have been devastated by Israeli forces with American support. The fall of the Assad regime in Syria has left Iran without its other great Middle Eastern ally. It is not without question that a change in tactic could come as sharply as the United States has shifted its views on Russia.
Meanwhile, further American intelligence shows that Israel has been considering strikes against Iranian nuclear sites. Trump’s transition team considered the possibility initially before deciding on a more measured approach. However, he did not rule out strikes if other options failed. Our closest Middle Eastern allies are keen on the idea of protecting their future interests. After rejecting their desires over the years, maybe it is time to hear them out.
Additionally, there is clearly no diplomatic solution in the near future. President Trump was the decision maker behind the withdrawal from the JCPOA, and Iran has already rejected negotiations just two months into Trump’s second term. It is nearly unthinkable that after the last decade of animosity between the two parties that anything will change during a Trump presidency. That is especially true if Arab-Israeli relations progress as President Trump has advocated for. There is no world in which Iran would negotiate with the United States while the United States encourages what amounts to a one-state solution with no right of return. The likelihood of the current status quo remaining for the next four years seems slim. Are we supposed to just hope Iran remains satisfied with their nuclear program where it is?
All of this is to say that the use of an Iranian nuclear weapon against the United States or any of its allies could be catastrophic, no matter the size. As Keir Lieber and Daryl Press laid out in a piece titled The Return of Nuclear Escalation, U.S. enemies have turned our Cold War strategy against us. Even though Iran is vastly outmatched in terms of conventional military capability, a handful of nuclear weapons deployed against the United States could not only cause immense damage and devastation but could also place the United States in an extremely precarious situation of having to decide how to respond. How would the world feel if the United States trained its massive arsenal on Iran? Would our nuclear posture no longer have legitimacy if we refused to respond in kind or without escalation? Would a response trigger a broader war? These are questions that no American should want to find out the answers to. Precise military action with our Middle Eastern partners would rid us of the chance to find out. Destruction of the Iranian nuclear program would help bring much-needed stability and peace to the Middle East.