Analysts Assess Impact of Military Attack on Iran
Analysts Assess Impact of Military Attack on Iran.
Voice of America
June 19, 2013
The international community has been trying for years to persuade Iran to end its uranium-enrichment program, but to no avail. Low-enriched uranium can be used for civilian nuclear-power plants, but highly enriched uranium is an integral part of a nuclear bomb.
In an effort to pressure Tehran to end its enrichment program, the U.N. Security Council has imposed sanctions on Iran. And several individual nations, such as the United States, have imposed their own measures, for example targeting Tehran’s oil industry and financial sector.
In addition, two rounds of international negotiations held this year failed to yield any progress. But some analysts believe there may be a chance for movement with the election of moderate cleric Hassan Rowhani as Iran’s new president.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, however, said the international community must not engage in what he called “wishful thinking” about Iran’s leadership.
Iran Seen as an Existential Threat to Israel
Israel considers a nuclear armed Iran to be an existential threat. And it has hinted that it is capable of carrying out a military strike against Iran’s nuclear facilities to make sure Iran does not build a bomb.
Paul Rogers, a military analyst at Bradford University in England, northeast of Manchester, said the Israelis are faced with a difficult task.
“The Iranians have been quite dedicated in recent years in putting a proportion of their nuclear facilities quite deep underground, probably too deep for the Israelis to hi,” said Rogers. “The U.S. Air Force does now have a very powerful new deep bunker buster, but there is no indication that it is willing to give that to Israel. It has given other, medium-level bunker busters to Israel, but not the really powerful one, the ‘Massive Earth Penetrator.’”
Thomas Hammes, a military expert at the National Defense University, said the Iranian targets must be well defined.
“This makes the huge assumption that we know where these facilities are,” he said. “Remember, we invaded Iraq because we were sure there were weapons of mass destruction there and we knew exactly where some of them were. And we were right zero percent of the time.”
Hammes asks if the U.S. intelligence capability has improved so much in the last 10 years?
Attack on Iran May be Counter-productive
Former U.S. Ambassador Ryan Crocker, whose foreign posts included Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan and Syria, said if there is going to be any military action, it must be successful.
“The only thing worse than an Iran with nuclear weapons would be an Iran with nuclear weapons that one or more countries attempted to prevent them from obtaining by military strikes – and failed,” he said.
Jim Walsh, an expert on Iran’s nuclear program at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, said military action against Iran might be counter-productive.
“I fear that a military strike will produce the very thing you are trying to avoid, which is the Iranian government would meet the day after the attack and say: ‘Oh yeah, we’ll show you – we are going to build a nuclear weapon,’” he said. “I think we will get a weapon’s decision following an attack, which is the last thing we want to produce right now.”
Is a Nuclear-armed Iran Unacceptable?
Many governments, and analysts, say a nuclear-armed Iran is unacceptable.
But Thomas Hammess at the National Defense University takes another view.
“We certainly lived with a nuclear-armed Soviet Union for a long time. We are currently living, perhaps, with a nuclear-armed North Korea and we are with a nuclear-armed China,” said Hammess. “So the presence of nuclear arms does not necessarily mean you can’t live with or operate with a country. I don’t understand what makes Iran so much more dangerous with a nuclear weapon.”
Hammess said if Iran ever manufactures nuclear weapons and decides to use them, Israel will probably destroy that country. If not Israel, says Hammess, then the United States probably will.
WarSclerotic 
June 20, 2013 at 4:23 PM
What scares me about this kind of ivory tower assessment is that these people forget the horrific results dismissed in their conclusions …”If Iran builds and uses a Nuclear weapon.” How many millions of people is Mr. Hammess so casually willing to see incinerated….5–10 million. Yes, I guess someone will do somthing then. …maybe even Obama..maybe
June 20, 2013 at 6:27 PM
“… And we were right zero percent of the time.”
Hammes asks if the U.S. intelligence capability has improved so much in the last 10 years?”
Hey, dont’t worry. Remember, Joe Biden said that the US will know when the Iranians try to put the enriched material into a bomb.
Ironclad intelligence …
“Hammess said if Iran ever manufactures nuclear weapons and decides to use them, Israel will probably destroy that country. If not Israel, says Hammess, then the United States probably will.”
Probably? How reassuring.
Guess, it depends on whether Obavez had a good vaction and a good round of golf or not.
“… I don’t understand what makes Iran so much more dangerous with a nuclear weapon.”.
What could it in the world could it possibly be? Hm.
And these are the military experts from National Defense University.
My grandma could have given a better answer than this moron.
Seriously, if this reflects the quality of the US-military experts, the US is in deep trouble.
Why not let every country in the world have their nukes?
We all know that MAD works allways, don’t we?
Altogether a bullshit article through and through.
We have reached a point where many who are just mere bloggers have a much higher standard than these ‘journalists’.
Many bloggers would just be ashamed and too embarassed to write such BS on their blogs.
Hell, I wouldn’t even dare to write such BS in my comments.
June 20, 2013 at 6:35 PM
I do not know what makes Mr Hammes and Mr Walsh experts,but their analysis leaves a lot to be desired.If iran ever decided to use their nukes against Israel what makes him think that Israel will be able to destroy Iran?Israel thru its subs might be able to inflict damage,but not destroy Iran in the magnitude Iran destroys Israel-God forbid.Israel’s chance is premptive attack on Iran.And that means an all out war.
June 20, 2013 at 6:46 PM
As usual: Iran is not going build a nuclear bomb, and Israel is not going to attack Iran. All the talk about it is just a waste of oxygen
June 20, 2013 at 6:52 PM
As usual we also believe in unicorns, the tooth fairy and the 12. imam.
As usual your comments are a waste of data bandwidth and electrical power.
June 20, 2013 at 7:26 PM
Yes, oxygen will be at a very high demand in Iran.
June 20, 2013 at 7:07 PM
I cannot believe that someone like Thomas hammes gets paid to come up with ideas like this maybe he should get out more! MAD only works in a nuclear age with countries and people who do not look forward to the after life
June 20, 2013 at 8:04 PM
@ tom: We’re in a whole lot of trouble, then; how many Evangelical Christian Dispensationalists are there in the US that actually want armageddon as soon as possible, so Jesus will hurry up and return?!?
June 20, 2013 at 8:42 PM
You are sounding like renbe.
If you know anything about Christian eschatology you’ll see that no Christian believes that we can hasten the return of Jesus by causing Armageddon.
In contrast this is exactly the believe of the Iranian Shia twelvers who believe that they can hasten the coming of the 12. imam or the Mahdi by causing world wide chaos and desaster.
June 20, 2013 at 9:50 PM
he is fsb
June 20, 2013 at 9:11 PM
No Armageddon will happen if one day Iran will wake up and suddenly will discover that it has no missiles bases, no air force, no navy and no nuclear facilities. If, from the other side, Iran will keep intact all its assets, they will have enough power to trigger what people call, the Armageddon. So, the conclusion is crystal clear: the more damage Iran will get, more quiet the world will be. Like Germany, back in the days. Iran put itself in this position by its politics, the proliferation of international terror, aspirations of world domination and acquiring nuclear weapons while threatening other states with destruction. To cut those black tentaculites, one must go straight for the head. Send them back to the time in history to which they belong and everybody in the region will drink champagne and celebrate. Even Al Qaeda.