Home

A new report by a congressional committee appointed to address the threat of nuclear proliferation warns of a possible "cascade" of nuclear weaponization if Iran and North Korea are successful in their pursuit of nuclear weapons capability.

"The Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty (NPT) is facing the prospect of an unraveling that could be its permanent undoing," the authors state. "Iran and North Korea have pursued nuclear weapons-related programs that the world cannot permit to succeed."

The 120-plus-page report, which covers background, findings, and recommendations vis-à-vis the global threat of weapons of mass destruction, is titled WORLD AT RISK: The Report of the Commission on the Prevention of WMD Proliferation and Terrorism. The commission is chaired by former Florida Sen. Bob Graham and vice-chaired by former Missouri Sen. Jim Talent.

In the section of the report on the challenge specific to Iran, the authors state point-blank the West's obligation to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons. One reason for this is that, according to the authors, other states interested in attaining nuclear capability would likely pursue that capability if Iran is successful.

"Such a wave of nuclear proliferation would seriously jeopardize the current world order, creating profound new risks and increasing instability," the authors write.

The authors note that Iranian leaders insist the country is enriching uranium for peaceful purposes, but that such activity could be used to illegally develop nuclear weapons. The evidence suggests, however, that Iran is attempting to become the third NPT member since 1991 to evade international nuclear inspectors under the guise of maintaining a peaceful nuclear program, and then moving their own illicit program forward.

The authors warn that, should Iran acquire nuclear weapons, other countries that might follow suit include Egypt, Algeria, Turkey, Brazil, Argentina, Saudi Arabia, Libya, South Korea, and Taiwan.

The United States, according to the report, has been concerned about Iranian nuclear ambitions for a decade. That speculation crystallized further in 2002, when a London-based Iranian opposition group called the National Council of Resistance of Iran disclosed details about a clandestine heavy-water plant at Arak, as well as an underground uranium enrichment facility at Natanz. The U.S. then publicly accused Iran of flouting both the NPT and International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) agreements.

"Three years later," the authors write, "the IAEA Board of Governors expressed an 'absence of confidence that Iran's nuclear program is exclusively for peaceful purposes'."

In early 2006, the IAEA voted to consider Iran a possible NPT violator; in late 2006, the United Nations Security Council ordered Iran to stop its program, and began threatening sanctions. The European Union then complemented the UN efforts by offering Iran economic incentives to terminate its program.

"The United States has not engaged in direct negotiation with Tehran, but has worked closely with the EU regarding its incentives effort," the authors explain. "Britain, China, France, Germany, Russia, and the United States have held out the possibility of a package of political and economic benefits if Tehran suspends its enrichment of uranium. To date, these efforts to find a diplomatic solution have failed."

The authors also note that IAEA Director General Mohamed ElBaradei, who has generally been seen as sympathetic to Iran and who has defended Iran in the past in efforts that critics say were intended to run out the clock on the Bush administration, expressed concern about Iran's activities "in the absence of full clarity" about the Iranian nuclear program.

"Just how much time does the world have to seek this 'full clarity' and decide what to do?" the authors ask. "Experts such as David Albright, of the Institute for Science and International Security, have underscored that the timeline for Iran's acquisition of sufficient HEU (highly enriched uranium) to build a nuclear bomb is ominously short - it ranges from only six months to two years."

The commission's recommendation with regard to Iran is that the administration of Barack Obama "must stop" the Iranian nuclear program. If the administration seeks to end Iran's uranium enrichment through diplomacy, it must be done from a position of strength, the authors state.

"Such engagement must be backed by the credible threat of direct action in the event that diplomacy fails," the authors write.

The reports reminds readers that in 2004, the U.N. High-Level Panel on Threats, Challenges, and Change warned that the erosion of the NPT was coming dangerously close to being irreversible.

"We cannot, through global inaction, allow that cascade of proliferation," the authors declare. "It could doom populations the world over."