Israel Unlikely To Attack Iran Nuclear Program

Israel is also thought to have mounted cyberattacks on Iran's nuclear program, most prominently in June 2010 with the introduction of Stuxnet computer malware into Iranian nuclear facilities. Believed to have been created through collaboration between US and Israeli intelligence, the Stuxnet malware was designed to disrupt centrifuge operations at Natanz severely and is thought to have set back Iran's nuclear weapons program by years.

The status of Iran's nuclear weapons program remains unclear. The country developed a civil nuclear program under the late shah.

In 1970 it ratified the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty , committing the country not to possess nor develop nuclear weapons. But in the late 1980s Iran initiated a clandestine uranium enrichment program , acquiring essential equipment and materials from Pakistan and China. During the late 1990s and early 2000s, Iran pursued a secret nuclear weapons development project, known as the Amad plan .

Work on this plan was thought to have halted in 2003 following the US invasion of Iraq. But it is thought that, by then, Iran had the capacility to build a small and fairly crude nuclear device .

A great deal of what we know about the development of Iran's nuclear weapons program stems from the 2018 Mossad raid. This revealed that work on weapons development was not entirely halted, and that Iran continued to work on improving its nuclear weapons capability.

The US has responded over the years by applying increasingly severe sanctions designed to deter Iran from continuing its program. At the same time, back-channel negotiations continued, resulting in the joint comprehensive plan of action (JCPOA) signed by Iran and the P5+1 (the five permanent members of the UN security council – China, France, Russia, the US and the UK – plus Germany).

In return for sanctions relief, Iran agreed to reduce its uranium enrichment program to a level insufficient for building nuclear warheads. It was restricted to enriching uranium up to 3.67%, a level adequate for civilian nuclear energy and scientific research , and all facilities were subject to inspection by the International Atomic Energy agency. The restrictions would be in place for 15 years.

In May 2018, the Trump administration abandoned the JCPOA . Iran responded by re-energizing its weapons program. According to a research briefing held in the House of Commons Library, the country is now thought to have exceeded the agreed limit for its uranium stockpile by a factor of 18 times and has elevated its enrichment operations to 60%.

It has resumed operations at nuclear facilities previously prohibited under the terms of the agreement and, since February 2021, has prevented the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) from effectively monitoring its nuclear sites.

According to a report by the Arms Control Association in Washington, Iran's nuclear program is now too advanced and widely distributed to be effectively nullified by military action. There are several reasons for this.

First, Iran possesses the requisite expertise to develop nuclear weapons, which cannot be eradicated through bombing raids. While targeting Iranian facilities would temporarily hinder the program, any setbacks would likely be short-lived.

Sign up for one of our free newsletters

• The Daily ReportStart your day right with Asia Times' top stories
• AT Weekly ReportA weekly roundup of Asia Times' most-read stories

Destroying Iran's nuclear facilities in Natanz would be essential, but accessing these facilities would necessitate a significant number of airstrikes penetrating deep into Iranian territory while circumventing or overpowering its air defense systems.

In recent years, Iran has fortified its Natanz facility, building deep tunnels to prevent airborne attack. Even if this facility were damaged, it is thought that Iran would be capable of reconstituting it quickly – especially since various components, including the uranium centrifuges, may already have been moved to unknown sites .

So, an effort to destroy Iran's nuclear program would require a large-scale military assault. This certainly would prompt a military response from Tehran, and it probably would persuade the Islamic Republic further that it must accelerate its efforts to acquire its own mature nuclear deterrent.

In such a scenario, Iran might also opt to withdraw from the nuclear non-proliferation treaty, eliminating any obligation for inspections by the IAEA.

For all these reasons, the former Israeli prime minister Ehud Olmert – a regular critic of Netanyahu – said recently :“Israel can do a lot to damage Iran's infrastructure, but Israel has no means to be able to destroy the nuclear program of Iran.”

Christoph Bluth is a professor of international relations and security at the University of Bradford .

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article .