Nuclear Iran could force U.S. withdrawal from Middle East
[ Page 123 ]
Even if Iran never drops its nukes on anybody, once it demonstrates that it has acquired them— say, by testing them—these weapons would have considerable consequences for our security and that of our allies. Desch correctly reports, “The concern is that once Iran develops a nuclear capability, it would become even more aggressive in support- ing terrorist groups like Hezbollah in Lebanon or Hamas in Gaza . . . Finally, many Americans fear that once Iran fields a nuclear weapon, it will become ever more meddlesome in Iraq.” The side effects of allowing Iran to obtain nukes are well spelled out by Emanuele Ottolenghi, the executive director of the Transatlantic Institute in Brussels. I hence quote him at some length. He writes–
The fact is that an Iranian bomb would enable Tehran to fulfill the goals of the revolution without using it. A nuclear bomb is a force multiplier that, as U.S. President Barack Obama aptly said, constitutes a ‘game changer.’ Iran’s success will change the Middle East forever—and for the worse. Under an Iranian nuclear umbrella, terror- ists will be able to act with impunity, and its neighbors will enter into a dangerous arms race. Less understood are the dynam- ics that will emerge if Iran chooses not to use the bomb against its enemies. It mat- ters little that Tehran may act rationally. If Iran goes nuclear, the Western world will have to negotiate a Middle East Yalta with Tehran—one that may entail a U.S. withdrawal, an unpleasant bargain for the smaller principalities of the Gulf’s shores and an unacceptable one for Israel and Lebanon’s Christians.