Home Contact Us  
   

Peace Audit and Ceasefire Monitor - Articles

Print Bookmark Email Facebook Subscribe
#4902, 27 July 2015
 

Voice from America

The Iran Deal: Is it Hard to Resist?
Amit Gupta
Associate Professor, Department of International Security, USAF Air War College, Alabama
 

After much pain and negotiation, the P5+1 and Iran have reached a nuclear deal. Inevitably, the Republicans, along with a set of strange bedfellows consisting of Israel, the Arab states of the Persian Gulf, and even some Democrats, are questioning the agreement because they are suspicious of Iranian intentions.

The deal’s opponents argue that it does not roll back the Iranian nuclear program and it endangers America’s allies—most notably Israel and Saudi Arabia—and it encourages Iranian expansionism and support for terrorism.  The debate, however, ignores the realities on the ground in the Middle East and in the broader international system.  

First, nowhere in the American debate is it acknowledged that Israel has nuclear weapons along with reliable delivery systems.  What we have, therefore, is not a weak, defenseless Israel but, instead, a situation where Jerusalem not only has a deterrent but also the ability to deliver a guaranteed second strike against Iran.  Moreover, unlike India, Israel can, and does, take steps to deter unconventional aggression (terrorism).  Thus the Israelis carry out targeted assassinations and retaliatory strikes against non-state actors to prevent future terrorist activity.

Second, the problem for the Israelis is that for some time they have been threatening to take unilateral action against Iran but lack the ability to do so. They lack the logistical and Intelligence, Surveillance, and Reconnaissance (ISR) capabilities to undertake a strike against Iranian nuclear facilities.  Such support would have to come from the US and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has done a good job of alienating US President Barack Obama.  

Third, Saudi Arabia, which wants to fight a Sunni-Shia religious war against Iran, on its own, cannot sustain a conventional military battle against Tehran and needs foreign military labour—Pakistani and American—to do so. Hence both Saudi Arabia and Israel are desperately trying to egg on the US to go to war.  

Fourth, the American population has war fatigue and has no stomach for a military invasion and subsequently a potential occupation of Iran.  Fifteen years of fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan has taken away the appetite for such a conflict.

Republicans like John Sidney McCain and Lindsay Olin Graham blithely talk of placing troops all over the Middle East without asking the American people what they want.  The answer is that while the American people will support a short bombing campaign, they are far less enthusiastic about putting boots on the ground.  The latter point is important since Americans now realise that in the short to medium term they will not be exiting Iraq or Afghanistan.  Occupying and subsequently sitting in Iran for a decade has very little appeal to the American public.

Fifth, the US cannot afford another drawn out war and neither can its European allies.  The long-term bill for Iraq and Afghanistan, according to the Nobel Prize winning economist Joe Stiglitz, is upwards of $3 trillion and another war would have severely adverse financial consequences.  Further, the debate in America is now about the growing economic inequality in the country and the fact that it will require a reallocation of funds, from defence to social and economic programs, to address this issue.  

Nor will the allies step up to the plate.  Iraq was a popular war for the allies since they had few causalities—Britain was a notable exception. But with high casualties, the allies’ commitment begins to weaken.  The Canadians, for example, lost 157 troops in Afghanistan and decided to withdraw because a higher level of casualties would have been unacceptable to Canadian public opinion.  In the Libya, campaign NATO ran out of precision-guided munitions and had to use F-16s because the US could provide the needed weaponry.  Add to this the fact that most of the NATO countries have aging populations that need expensive health care and wasting money of defence and external adventures does not remain as a viable option.

Sixth, at a cynical level, there is an economic window of opportunity that opens up with the Iran deal.  The Gulf states and Saudi Arabia, none of whom can independently or collectively take on Iran, will seek to buy more American weaponry so as to strengthen Washington’s security guarantees to these countries.  Further, as Iran begins to pump oil, analysts expect the price of petroleum to fall by as much as $10 a barrel thus giving major relief to the economies of the world.

Two alternatives, therefore, emerge for American foreign policy vis-à-vis Iran:

Ratify the agreement and work diplomatically to expand Iran’s engagement with the world. Or, reject the agreement, denounce Iran, and get it to move forward on the path to nuclear weapons.  If the latter happens, there is no guarantee that the other members of P5+1 will stand with Washington.  

Amit Gupta is an Associate Professor in the Department of International Security Studies at the USAF Air War College in Montgomery, Alabama.  The views in this article are his and do not necessarily reflect those of the USAF or the Department of Defense.

Print Bookmark Email Facebook Subscribe
IPCS Columnists
Af-Pak Diary
D Suba Chandran
Resetting Kabul-Islamabad Relations: Three Key Issues
Can Pakistan Reset its Relations with Afghanistan?
The New Afghanistan: Four Major Challenges for President Ghani
Big Picture
Prof Varun Sahni
Understanding Democracy and Diversity in J&K
When Xi Met Modi: Juxtaposing China and India
Pakistan?s Tactical Nuclear Weapons: The Inevitability of Instability

Dateline Colombo

Asanga Abeyagoonasekera.
Sri Lanka: Moving Towards a Higher Collective Outcome
The Importance of Electing the Best to our Nation's Parliament
Sri Lanka: Toward a Diaspora Re-Engagement Plan
Dateline Islamabad
Salma Malik
Pakistan's Hurt Locker: What Next?
IPCS Forecast: Pakistan in 2015
India-Pakistan Relations in 2015: Through a Looking Glass
 
Dhaka Discourse
Prof Delwar Hossain
IPCS Forecast: Bangladesh in 2015
18th SAARC Summit: A Perspective from Bangladesh
Bangladesh in Global Forums: Diplomacy vs. Domestic Politics
Eagle Eye
Prof Chintamani Mahapatra
India-US: Significance of the Second Modi-Obama Meet
Has President Obama Turned Lame Duck?
Modi-Obama Summit: Criticism for Criticism?s Sake?

East Asia Compass
Dr Sandip Mishra
India-Japan-US Trilateral: India?s Policy for the Indo-Pacific
China-South Korea Ties: Implications for the US Pivot to Asia
Many ?Pivots to Asia?: What Does It Mean For Regional Stability?
Himalayan Frontier
Pramod Jaiswal
Nepal?s New Constitution: Instrument towards Peace or Catalyst to Conflict?
IPCS Forecast: Nepal in 2015
Constitution-making: Will Nepal Miss its Second Deadline?

Indo-Pacific
Prof Shankari Sundararaman
IPCS Forecast: Southeast Asia in 2015
Indonesia's Pacific Identity: What Jakarta Must Do in West Papua
Modi in Myanmar: From ?Look East? to ?Act East?
Indus-tan
Sushant Sareen
IPCS Forecast: Pakistan in 2015
Islamic State: Prospects in Pakistan
Pakistan: The Futility of Internationalising Kashmir

Looking East
Wasbir Hussain
Myanmar in New Delhi's Naga Riddle
China: ?Peaceful? Display of Military Might
Naga Peace Accord: Need to Reserve Euphoria
Maritime Matters
Vijay Sakhuja
Indian Ocean: Modi on a Maritime Pilgrimage
Indian Ocean: Exploring Maritime Domain Awareness
IPCS Forecast: The Indian Ocean in 2015

Nuke Street
Amb Sheelkant Sharma
US-Russia and Global Nuclear Security: Under a Frosty Spell?
India's Nuclear Capable Cruise Missile: The Nirbhay Test
India-Australia Nuclear Agreement: Bespeaking of a New Age
Red Affairs
Bibhu Prasad
Countering Left Wing Extremism: Failures within Successes
Return of the Native: CPI-Maoist in Kerala
The Rising Civilian Costs of the State-Vs-Extremists Conflict

Regional Economy
Amita Batra
India and the APEC
IPCS Forecast: South Asian Regional Integration
South Asia: Rupee Regionalisation and Intra-regional Trade Enhancement
South Asian Dialectic
PR Chari
Resuming the Indo-Pak Dialogue: Evolving a New Focus
Defence Management in India: An Agenda for Parrikar
Pakistani Taliban and Al Qaeda in Afghanistan: Implications for Asian Security

Spotlight West Asia
Amb Ranjit Gupta
Prime Minister Modi Finally Begins His Interaction with West Asia*
A Potential Indian Role in West Asia?
US-GCC Summit: More Hype than Substance
Strategic Space
Manpreet Sethi
India-Russia Nuclear Vision Statement: See that it Delivers
Global Nuclear Disarmament: The Humanitarian Consequences Route
Nasr: Dangers of Pakistan's Short Range Ballistic Missile

The Strategist
Vice Admiral Vijay Shankar
Jihadi Aggression and Nuclear Deterrence
The Blight of Ambiguity
Falun Gong: The Fear Within


OTHER REGULAR contributors
Gurmeet Kanwal
Harun ur Rashid
N Manoharan
Wasbir Hussain
Rana Banerji
N Manoharan

Ruhee Neog
Teshu Singh
Aparupa Bhattacherjee
Roomana Hukil
Aparupa Bhattacherjee


 

Browse by Publications

Commentaries 
Issue Briefs 
Special Reports 
Research Papers 
Seminar Reports 
Conference Reports 

Browse by Region/Countries

East Asia 
South Asia 
Southeast Asia 
US & South Asia 
China 
Myanmar 
Afghanistan 
Iran 
Pakistan 
India 
J&K  

Browse by Issues

India & the world  
Indo-Pak 
Military 
Terrorism 
Naxalite Violence 
Nuclear 
Suicide Terrorism 
Peace & Conflict Database 
Article by same Author
PR Chari: Scholar, Gentleman, Institution Builder

The Battle against FIFA: Combating Corruption or Combating Power Transition?

Why the Rafale Deal Must be Welcomed

Obama’s Rapprochement with Cuba

China's Global Ambition: Need to Emulate Germany

Mid-Term Elections: So What If the US Swings Hard Right?

Modi’s US Visit: So Much Promise, Such Little Outcome

India and Australia: Beyond Curry, Cricket, and Commonwealth

Obama’s Russian Dilemma

And Then There is the Middle East: The Lack of an End-Game

US and the World Cup: Nationalism without Football?

India-US: Will Modi and Obama Come Together?

India, Pakistan and Tactical Nuclear Weapons: Irrelevance for South Asia

Boston Bombings: Possible Lessons

Special Commentary: India’s Missile Defence

If Pakistan Fails

ADD TO:
Blink
Del.icio.us
Digg
Furl
Google
Simpy
Spurl
Y! MyWeb
Facebook
 
Print Bookmark Email Facebook Subscribe
Year 2017
 January  February  March  April  May  June  July  August  September
 2016  2015  2014  2013  2012  2011  2010  2009
 2008  2007  2006  2005  2004  2003  2002  2001
 2000  1999  1998  1997
 
 

The Institute of Peace and Conflict Studies (IPCS) is the premier South Asian think tank which conducts independent research on and provides an in depth analysis of conventional and non-conventional issues related to national and South Asian security including nuclear issues, disarmament, non-proliferation, weapons of mass destruction, the war on terrorism, counter terrorism , strategies security sector reforms, and armed conflict and peace processes in the region.

For those in South Asia and elsewhere, the IPCS website provides a comprehensive analysis of the happenings within India with a special focus on Jammu and Kashmir and Naxalite Violence. Our research promotes greater understanding of India's foreign policy especially India-China relations, India's relations with SAARC countries and South East Asia.

Through close interaction with leading strategic thinkers, former members of the Indian Administrative Service, the Foreign Service and the three wings of the Armed Forces - the Indian Army, Indian Navy, and Indian Air Force, - the academic community as well as the media, the IPCS has contributed considerably to the strategic discourse in India.

 
Subscribe to Newswire | Site Map
18, Link Road, Jungpura Extension, New Delhi 110014, INDIA.

Tel: 91-11-4100-1902    Email: officemail@ipcs.org

© Copyright 2017, Institute of Peace and Conflict Studies.