Nuclear Prevention and Red Lines: The Case of Iran

{
  "authors": [
    "Pierre Goldschmidt"
  ],
  "type": "legacyinthemedia",
  "centerAffiliationAll": "dc",
  "centers": [
    "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
    "Malcolm H. Kerr Carnegie Middle East Center"
  ],
  "collections": [],
  "englishNewsletterAll": "ctw",
  "nonEnglishNewsletterAll": "",
  "primaryCenter": "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
  "programAffiliation": "NPP",
  "programs": [
    "Nuclear Policy"
  ],
  "projects": [],
  "regions": [
    "Middle East",
    "Iran",
    "Gulf"
  ],
  "topics": [
    "Security",
    "Nuclear Policy",
    "Nuclear Energy"
  ]
}

In The Media

Nuclear Prevention and Red Lines: The Case of Iran

Although there is no precedent for a preventive UN Security Council resolution, it should be more effective in making clear to Iran the negative consequences of its actions than any post facto curative measure.

By Pierre Goldschmidt

Published on Mar 22, 2010

Source: Paper prepared for IISS-CFR Workshop

Nuclear Prevention and Red Lines: The Case of IranPrecautionary measures have not been sufficiently applied to preventing against the risks of nuclear proliferation. Iran has repeatedly crossed red lines regarding its nuclear program with impunity. The best way to prevent the Iranian nuclear crisis from escalating would be for the UN Security Council (UNSC) to adopt a resolution under Chapter VII of the UN Charter deciding that if Iran were to produce high enriched uranium, to separate plutonium, or to notify its withdrawal from the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), a number of strong and well-defined sanctions would automatically be implemented without requiring a further UNSC resolution. Although there is no precedent for such a preventive UNSC resolution, it should be more effective in making clear to Iran the negative consequences of its actions than any post facto curative measure.

About the Author

Pierre Goldschmidt

Former Nonresident Senior Associate, Nuclear Policy Program

Goldschmidt was a nonresident senior associate at the Carnegie Endowment.

Recent Work

Article
A Realistic Approach Toward a Middle East Free of WMD
- Pierre Goldschmidt
Article
Serious Deficiencies Exposed by Latest IAEA Safeguards Implementation Report
- Pierre Goldschmidt

Security Nuclear Policy Nuclear Energy Middle East Iran Gulf

Carnegie does not take institutional positions on public policy issues; the views represented herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of Carnegie, its staff, or its trustees.

More Work from Carnegie Europe

Commentary
The Denmark-Greenland-U.S. Agreement Needs to Stand the Test of Time
The new U.S.–Denmark–Greenland agreement will help Washington exert political, economic, and financial dominance under the guise of security. Yet, it acknowledged Copenhagen’s and Nuuk’s sovereignty on the island.
Marc Pierini
Commentary
Strategic Europe
A Black Sea Truce Is About Global Food Security, Too
A summer of escalation in the Black Sea has hurt Ukraine economically and is exacerbating world food security. A truce is needed—as is a broader reframing of Europe’s Ukraine strategy.
Thomas de Waal
Commentary
Strategic Europe
Taking the Pulse: Does the EU Have a Germany Problem?
Are Germany’s economic, industrial, and political struggles becoming a liability for the EU’s ability to rise to the geopolitical moment?
Rym Momtaz, ed.
Article
Europe’s Overseas Countries and Territories as Geopolitical Assets
European states control several Overseas Countries and Territories around the world that carry strategic, economic, and environmental weight. As great powers challenge the rules-based order, defending them is a geopolitical imperative for Europe.
Marc Pierini
Commentary
Strategic Europe
Why Russia Could Escalate Hybrid Warfare Against Europe
Mounting economic strain and battlefield losses will not necessarily make the Kremlin less dangerous. They could instead push Moscow toward a more aggressive hybrid campaign designed to test NATO’s Eastern flank, exploit allied hesitation, and fracture European resolve.
Maksym Beznosiuk, Robert Benson

More Work from Carnegie Europe

Greenland United States Denmark Agreement Nuuk

Commentary

The Denmark-Greenland-U.S. Agreement Needs to Stand the Test of Time

The new U.S.–Denmark–Greenland agreement will help Washington exert political, economic, and financial dominance under the guise of security. Yet, it acknowledged Copenhagen’s and Nuuk’s sovereignty on the island.

Marc Pierini

Commentary

Strategic Europe

A Black Sea Truce Is About Global Food Security, Too

A summer of escalation in the Black Sea has hurt Ukraine economically and is exacerbating world food security. A truce is needed—as is a broader reframing of Europe’s Ukraine strategy.

Thomas de Waal

Commentary

Strategic Europe

Taking the Pulse: Does the EU Have a Germany Problem?

Are Germany’s economic, industrial, and political struggles becoming a liability for the EU’s ability to rise to the geopolitical moment?

Rym Momtaz, ed.

Article

Europe’s Overseas Countries and Territories as Geopolitical Assets

European states control several Overseas Countries and Territories around the world that carry strategic, economic, and environmental weight. As great powers challenge the rules-based order, defending them is a geopolitical imperative for Europe.

Marc Pierini

Commentary

Strategic Europe

Why Russia Could Escalate Hybrid Warfare Against Europe

Mounting economic strain and battlefield losses will not necessarily make the Kremlin less dangerous. They could instead push Moscow toward a more aggressive hybrid campaign designed to test NATO’s Eastern flank, exploit allied hesitation, and fracture European resolve.

Maksym Beznosiuk, Robert Benson