For Iran to admit that it worked on nuclear weapons would be more significant than Iran’s 2003 statement that it failed to declare to the IAEA a flurry of nuclear activities which could be justified by Iran’s peaceful nuclear program.
The dispute between Moscow and Washington about Russia’s new missile allegedly breaching the INF Treaty might signify the rising risk of a breakdown of arms control arrangements between the United States and Russia.
The recent developments in Asia-Pacific indicate a necessity to start serious talks for “stock-taking” of the military forces in the region. Also, Russia’s active involvement in regional security affairs is needed.
A final agreement could emerge on schedule if negotiators—especially in Iran and in the United States—respond to their domestic critics by cracking whips to get fast results.
The world would be a safer place if Iran did not enrich uranium, but contrary to the arguments that hawks put forward, the United States is not in any position to prevent Iran from doing so.
Wondering whether the historic nuclear talks with Iran will succeed or fail? Study the brain.
The success in concluding the initial step of the Iran deal was bought at the price of a lack of clarity about how all seven countries should proceed in negotiating the final step during the next twelve months.
In 2013, Europe was a peaceful place, but elsewhere in Eurasia, things were not as peaceful. This eventful year promises an interesting 2014.
In responding to the challenge of nuclear proliferation, nuclear trade controls and nuclear disarmament have separate missions.
The big strategic question is whether testing Iran’s intentions through negotiations is riskier than continuing to sanction and threaten to bomb it.