A coalition of states is seeking to avert a U.S. attack, and Israel is in the forefront of their mind.
Michael Young
{
"authors": [
"George Perkovich"
],
"type": "legacyinthemedia",
"centerAffiliationAll": "dc",
"centers": [
"Carnegie Endowment for International Peace"
],
"collections": [
"U.S. Nuclear Policy"
],
"englishNewsletterAll": "",
"nonEnglishNewsletterAll": "",
"primaryCenter": "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
"programAffiliation": "NPP",
"programs": [
"Nuclear Policy"
],
"projects": [],
"regions": [
"North America",
"United States",
"Middle East",
"Iran"
],
"topics": [
"Military",
"Foreign Policy",
"Nuclear Policy"
]
}REQUIRED IMAGE
Source: National Public Radio
Carnegie Endowment vice-president for studies - global security and economic development, George Perkovich weighed in on a question that is on the mind of many, on whether "We must tolerate a nuclear Iran" during a debate held by the Rosenkrantz Foundation sponsored series Intelligence Squared. See below and follow the link at the bottom for more information on this event.
Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, it can be argued, directs a repressive regime and dreams of leading the forces of radical Islam in an anti-American jihad. If the United States and its allies permit his country to develop nuclear weapons, jihadists elsewhere may conclude that they, too, will pay no penalty for pursuing their radical agenda.
It can also be said that Ahmadinejad is benefiting politically from his confrontation with America, heightening his standing both at home and abroad at a time when the image of the United States has suffered grievously in the Muslim world. If the United States threatens Iran with war or actually bombs its nuclear facilities, it may only strengthen Ahmadinejad and other radical elements in Iran, further destabilize the Middle East, and heighten the danger to the United States and its allies.
Few foreign policy challenges today are more vexing than the issue of how to deal with the prospect of a nuclear Iran, which made the question ideal for the first of a series of Oxford-style debates, called Intelligence Squared U.S.. The series, produced in New York City by WNYC, is based on the successful Intelligence Squared program which began in London in 2002.
The first U.S. debate, held Sept. 27 and moderated by Robert Siegel, brought together six expert analysts to consider both sides of the proposition, "We must tolerate a nuclear Iran."
To read more about this event and hear the debate in its entirety, please click on the following link- http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=6140564.
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.
A coalition of states is seeking to avert a U.S. attack, and Israel is in the forefront of their mind.
Michael Young
Implementing Phase 2 of Trump’s plan for the territory only makes sense if all in Phase 1 is implemented.
Yezid Sayigh
Fifteen years after the Arab uprisings, a new generation is mobilizing behind an inclusive growth model, and has the technical savvy to lead an economic transformation that works for all.
Jihad Azour
Israeli-Lebanese talks have stalled, and the reason is that the United States and Israel want to impose normalization.
Michael Young
Baku may allow radical nationalists to publicly discuss “reunification” with Azeri Iranians, but the president and key officials prefer not to comment publicly on the protests in Iran.
Bashir Kitachaev