World may have to live with nuclear Iran -US study

WASHINGTON (Reuters) – Iran is determined to acquire
nuclear weapons and the United States may find it less costly
to deter a nuclear-armed Iran than to dismantle its weapons
program, according to two U.S.-funded researchers who advise
the Pentagon.

“Can the United States live with a nuclear-armed Iran?
Despite its rhetoric, it may have no choice,” concluded the
report by Judith Yaphe and Air Force Col. Charles Lutes, which
was released on Thursday.

The potential for rolling back Iran’s program, once it
produces a nuclear weapon, “is lower than preventing it in the
first place and the costs of rollback may be higher than the
costs of deterring and containing a nuclear Iran,” they said.

The two analysts are senior fellows at the National Defense
University’s Institute for National Strategic Studies, which
does policy research for the Defense Department.

European powers Britain, France and Germany, with U.S.
support, have pursued so-far failed negotiations aimed at
persuading Iran to abandon its nuclear activities.

U.S. intelligence says Iran could produce a weapon in about
a decade. Tehran insist its aim is peaceful nuclear energy.

European and American officials have long acknowledged
privately that thwarting Iran’s ambitions is a long shot and
the new report reinforces that view.

In a 2001 report, Yaphe, a Mideast expert and former CIA
analyst, judged Iran as determined to acquire nuclear weapons.

Nothing in the intervening four years has diverted Tehran
from the “systematic pursuit of nuclear technology that could
contribute to a weapons program,” the new report concluded.

‘VIRTUAL NUCLEAR POWER’

The report says most Iran experts believe the Islamic
republic would choose to become a “virtual nuclear power,”
meaning it would not test but would be able to assemble a
weapon quickly from prefabricated components.

To U.S. ally Israel, “a nuclear-armed Iran is a clear and
present danger” and most Israeli strategists “do not question
if Israel should seek to remove Iranian nuclear facilities,”
only how or when it should be done, the report said.

However, the U.S. researchers warned that a U.S. or Israeli
pre-emptive military strike likely would rally Iranians around
a religious fundamentalist government in Tehran that they might
otherwise want to replace, spur new attacks by Iran-allied
groups like Hizbollah.

They also warned that if Washington sought to change the
government in Tehran — as it did in Iraq — there is an
“extremely high risk that the Iranian regime would use its
nuclear weapon in a last-ditch effort to save itself.”

On living with a nuclear-armed Iran, the analysts said
Tehran was unlikely to use its nuclear capability unless facing
an overwhelming threat and while it might become more assertive
in the region, superior U.S. capabilities could probably deter
significant mischief.

But they said the lack of direct communications between
Iran and the United States, Israel and its own neighbors makes
Tehran’s inability to recognize “red lines” — behavior which
the other countries will not tolerate — a great danger.

“Successful deterrence depends on the ability to understand
the other’s thinking and accurately anticipate its behavior,”
the researchers said.

Despite U.S. concerns that Iran might share nuclear
capabilities with “terrorist” groups, Yaphe and Lutes concluded
“Iran would not, as a matter of state policy, give up control
of such weapons to terrorist organizations.”

But they acknowledged doubts about whether Tehran could
control all elements of the Iranian system with access to that
technology.