{
"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.
For Putin, upgrading Russia’s nuclear forces was a secondary goal. The main aim was to gain an advantage over the West, including by strengthening the nuclear threat on all fronts. That made growth in missile arsenals and a new arms race inevitable.
Maxim Starchak
For a real example of political forces engaged in the militarization of society, the Russian leadership might consider looking closer to home.
James D.J. Brown
Instead of a guaranteed ally, the Kremlin now perceives Armenia as yet another hybrid battlefield where it is fighting the West.
Mikayel Zolyan
China has found a unique niche for itself within the global security ecosystem, eschewing military alliances to instead bolster countries’ internal stability using law enforcement. Authoritarian regimes from the Central African Republic to Uzbekistan are signing up.
Temur Umarov
What should happen when sanctions designed to weaken the Belarusian regime end up enriching and strengthening the Kremlin?
Denis Kishinevsky