An Israeli View of the Iranian Nuclear Challenge
By Efraim Inbar, Professor, Bar-Ilan University
Reviewed by Francis P. Sempa, Contributing Editor
Text: www.fpri.org/enotes/200804.inbar.israeliviewiraniannuclearchallenge.html

In a seminar talk at the Foreign Policy Research Institute in February, Efraim Inbar, political science professor at Bar-Ilan University and director of the Begin-Sadat Center for Strategic Studies in Israel, presented a stark view of the Iranian nuclear challenge to the world.

Inbar explained that Iran wants to acquire nuclear weapons for the following reasons: (1) as an insurance policy against possible efforts to destabilize the regime; (2) to deter a possible U.S. invasion; (3) to achieve regional hegemony; and (4) to block or limit Western influence in the region.

The Iranian strategy to acquire nuclear weapons, he stated, is to “talk and build” — use diplomacy with the West to gain time and ultimately present the Western powers with a fait accompli, the Iranian bomb. This is the same strategy that worked for North Korea.

Inbar is blunt about the consequences of a nuclear Iran. First, with a range exceeding 2000-2500 km, an Iranian bomb would pose an immediate threat to “the whole Middle East, Eastern Europe, India, Pakistan, even part of China.” Second, it would undermine U.S. credibility in the world because the United States has announced that it is unacceptable for Iran to acquire nuclear weapons. Third, it would increase Iran's influence over the “energy sector of the world economy,” which Inbar described geographically as an “energy ellipse” encompassing the Caspian Sea basin and the Persian Gulf area which contains 70-80% of the world's oil reserves. Fourth, it would embolden all radical Islamists. Fifth, it would enable Iran to achieve regional hegemony. Sixth, it would provide an additional impetus to Iranian efforts to export its Islamic revolution. Seventh, it would strengthen Iran's radical allies in the region, such as Hamas, Hezbollah, and Islamic Jihad. Eighth, it would further erode the attraction of Turkey as a secular role model for the Muslim world. Ninth, it would erode and likely shift the pro-Western orientation of the countries of Central Asia. Tenth, it would promote nuclear proliferation in the already volatile Middle East.

Inbar is equally blunt about what is needed to prevent, or at least delay, this threat. Diplomacy has been ineffective. Economic sanctions, he contends, have not and will not stop the mullahs from their quest for nuclear weapons. The credible threat to act militarily, he believes, has been thoroughly undermined by the recently released National Intelligence Estimate (NIE). That leaves only military action as a means for stopping or at least slowing down the Iranian quest for the bomb. If the United States will not act, Israel probably will.