For Iran’s Nuclear Program, a Month Is Longer Than It Sounds
Story by Jared Malsin, Laurence Norman • 10h
The furious debate over whether U.S. strikes obliterated Iran’s nuclear program or only delayed its progress toward being able to build a nuclear weapon by a few months skips over a key component in the equation: Iran’s political calculation.
If Iran were to make the decision to build a nuclear weapon, it would be betting that it can complete the job and establish deterrence before the U.S. and Israel intervene—through military action, economic pressure or diplomacy—to stop it.
A longer timeline increases the risk of being spotted or struck again, which could dissuade Iran from taking such a gamble in the first place. So measured on the Iranian nuclear clock, a delay of a few months could translate into a lot longer than it sounds if it keeps Tehran from moving ahead.
“If they start their breakout effort, and it takes them three more months, that’s a lot of time to respond. It gives you time to detect it. It gives you time to mount a response,” said Michael Singh, managing director at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy and a former senior official at the National Security Council. “It’s not nothing.”
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/for-iran-s-nuclear-program-a-month-is-longer-than-it-sounds/ar-AA1HJ23S?ocid=BingNewsSerp
