|
Iranian prolif causes cascading proliferation throughout the middle east
McInnis 5(Kathleen, Director, NATO ISAF Operations in the Office fo the the Secretary of Defense, The Washington Quarterly, Summer, pg. 182)jn
The emergence of a nuclear Iran would undoubtedly send shockwaves through the region that could result in a nuclear domino effect. Therein lies the crux of the problem: If Saudi Arabia were to follow Iran’s proliferation route, that would again change the calculations of every other state in the region in a cumulative and potentially dangerous manner. Continuing with Egypt, and with other dominos such as Turkey and Syria poised to fall, the proliferation challenge in the Middle East is uniquely daunting. Perhaps most worrisome is that the United States is left, at present, with few good options in the region to thwart this dangerous trajectory.
Iran Prolif Turns Turkey Prolif
Iranian prolif causes Turkey to proliferate
Clawson 6(Patrick, deputy director for research of the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, June, “Proliferation in the Middle East: Who is Next after Iran?”, https://hsdl.org/?view&doc=65117&coll=public, accessed 7/9/10)jn
Historically Turkey has been at peace with Iran, and the two countries have generally paid relatively little attention to each other, compared to what one might expect from two neighbors with considerable economic interaction. That said, Turkey has many reasons to worry about meddling by an Islamic Republic which is ideologically opposed to Ankara’s secular policies. If Turkey faces serious internal problems—be it from Islamists or from Kurds—Iran might seek to take advantage of that situation, and Iranian nuclear weapons would make Turkey think long and hard about how much it could complain about such Iranian meddling. In other words, an Iranian nuclear capability could make the Turkish General Staff nervous. Faced with a nuclear-armed Iran, Turkey’s first instinct would be to turn to the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO). Turkey places extraordinary value on its NATO membership, which symbolizes the West’s acceptance of Turkey—a delicate issue for a country which feels it is excluded from the EU on civilizational grounds more than for any other reason. The cold reality is that NATO was not designed to defend Turkey: assisting Turkey faced with a general Warsaw Pact invasion of Western Europe is one thing; defending Turkey when it alone faces a threat is an altogether different matter. It is not clear how much NATO members want to take on this burden. It will be only natural for Turkey to wonder how much it can rely on NATO. Were Turkey to decide that it had to proliferate in order to defend itself, it has good industrial and scientific infrastructures which it could draw upon to build nuclear weapons on its own. It would be difficult to prevent a determined Turkey from building nuclear weapons in well under a decade.
Iran Prolif Turns Everything
Iranian proliferation would trigger Middle East Proliferation, de-stabilize Iraq, increase terrorism, provide nuclear weapons to terrorists, kill the economy and U.S. Soft power.
Kyl 10(Senator Jon, June 24, “Congressional Speeches on the Iranian Threat”, http://www.aipac.org/Publications/Congressional_Statements_on_Iranian_Threat.pdf, accessed 7/9/10)jn
The same would be true if Iran acquired nuclear weapons. Even if the mullahs never actually detonated a nuclear bomb, their acquisition of a nuclear capability would forever change Iran's regional and global influence, and it would certainly forever change the Middle East. If Iran went nuclear, its neighbors--thinking particularly of Egypt, Saudi Arabia, and Turkey-- might feel compelled to pursue their own nuclear arsenals. Tehran could easily trigger a dangerous chain reaction of nuclear proliferation. Once they had nuclear weapons, the Iranians would be much more aggressive in supporting terrorist organizations that are killing even American troops, for example, in Iraq. The Iranians would also ramp up their support for Hezbollah and Hamas and possibly provide them with nuclear materials. They would be emboldened to conduct economic warfare against the West, for example, by disrupting oil shipments traveling through the Straits of Hormuz. Iran would also be more confident about expanding its footprint in Latin America, where it has established a close working relationship with Venezuelan strongman Hugo Chavez. Governments around the world would lose faith in America's reliability as a strategic partner. U.S. credibility would be irrevocably weakened.
Iranian Prolif Turns Israeli First Strike
Iranian prolif causes Israeli first strike
The Washington Institute for Near East Policy 9(March, “Preventing a Cascade of Instability”, http://washingtoninstitute.org/pubPDFs/PTF-Iran.pdf, accessed 7/9/10)jn
If the international community appears unable to stop Iran’s nuclear progress, Israel may decide to act unilaterally. Whatever Americans may think, Israeli leaders seem convinced that at least for now, they have a military option. However, Israelis see the option fading over the next one to two years, not only because of Iran’s nuclear progress and dispersion of its program but also because improved Iranian air defenses, especially the expected delivery of the S-300 surface-to-air missile system from Russia, are seen by Israel as seriously limiting its military options. Israel therefore may feel compelled to act before the option disappears. If successful, a strike would be publicly condemned but quietly welcomed by some. Success, however, is an uncertain outcome. Even a successful strike might slow Iran only temporarily. And many would see it as both a failure of and a setback for the treaty-based nonproliferation system. The United States itself may pay a high price for an Israeli strike; many will perceive that Washington gave Israel green light.
Do'stlaringiz bilan baham: |
