Use of force tops agenda on Iran

How close is the west getting to all-out conflict with Iran? As 2012 gets under way, the question is right at the top of the international security agenda. Hardly a day goes by without some striking news from the region – be it Iran’s decision to enrich uranium at a new underground site; or the unexplained killing of another Iranian nuclear scientist; or Iran’s threat to close the Strait of Hormuz.

It is hard to think of any moment since 2002 – the year that Iran’s nuclear programme was first uncovered – when the situation has seemed so hot. That said, the alarm can be overdone. Given the sheer number of military exercises being conducted by Iran, Israel and the US in the next few weeks, there is an outside chance that a conflict could accidentally erupt because of some misunderstanding in the Gulf. Otherwise, the big moments of decision in this long-running saga are still at least a year away.

There is one factor which explains why the situation around Iran has suddenly become inflamed: the decision by the US and European Union to impose sanctions that ban oil imports from Iran.

Until now, sanctions have mainly been targeted at entities related to Iran’s nuclear programme, the very thing the west is trying to halt. But the move to cut off Iran’s oil exports is already seriously hitting the country’s beleaguered economy. It is also prompting Iran’s threats over the Strait of Hormuz, one of the world’s main oil trade arteries.

Many in the west still doubt whether Iran’s threat to close the Strait is serious. By closing it Iran would be blocking its own oil exports. It would also likely be defeated by US naval and air power in any conflict. Besides, the EU – like the US – will next week be careful to phase in its sanctions. This may defer the pain inflicted on Iran for up to six more months.

But even if an immediate military conflict in the Strait is averted, this still leaves a wider question: how much longer can Israel and the US wait before they bomb Iran’s nuclear sites?

Events are once again throwing a spotlight on this question. Last November, the International Atomic Energy Agency, the world’s nuclear watchdog, judged that “Iran has carried out activities relevant to the development of a nuclear device”. Iran’s decision this week to build a second uranium enrichment site at Qom – a site that cannot be bombed from the air – is also significant. It raises fears in Israel that the nuclear programme is moving to a point where it will no longer be possible to halt it by external military action.

All this is alarming. Still, there are two reasons why an attack by Israel and the US is not imminent. First, both states continue to fear that an attack would trigger serious retaliation by Iran and could only delay, not halt, the nuclear programme. Secondly, while Iran is assembling a wide range of nuclear capabilities, the leadership has still not taken the big strategic decision to construct a nuclear bomb. As Mark Fitzpatrick of the International Institute for Strategic Studies puts it: “Iran certainly seeks a nuclear weapon in the long run. But there is no evidence that they have taken the final decision to build one. If they took that decision now, it would be another year before they could conduct a test, given all the facilities we know about.”

Some western intelligence agencies believe Iran will bide its time a little longer and enrich more uranium – but will not take the big strategic decision to race for the bomb in 2012. Still, in every other respect, the auguries are not good.

Some diplomats hope that the nuclear programme can be sabotaged by killing scientists or infecting it with computer worms. But there is no sign yet that this is bringing a decisive blow. Others hope that the Iranian leadership will be forced to negotiate. But the Iranian leadership seems increasingly determined to resist international demands to stop enriching uranium. If Iran sticks to this approach, then the question of whether or not to bomb will be the overwhelming issue at the start of the next US presidential term.

Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2012.