How to Navigate the Fog of War on Iran

As tensions escalate between the United States and Iran, it is vital to recognize the various issues at play. With all of the competing rhetoric, it can be hard to decipher what is actually occurring. This has been made even more difficult by the recent reported exchange of missiles, the issuance of sanctions, and the United States’ withdrawal from the JCPOA (the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action), more commonly known as the Iran Nuclear Deal. 

This article will attempt to alleviate some of the confusion by examining the history between the United States, Iran and its Middle Eastern neighbours, clarifying the issue of Iranian nuclear proliferation and its potential implications, and explaining what steps the international community can take in order to reduce the probability of a full-scale conflict.

Background between US and Iran

The US and Iran began to sour their diplomatic relations in the late 1950s. The US, who had backed out of a democratic election in Iran after the controversial election of Mohammed Mossadegh as Prime Minister and his subsequent attempts to nationalize the Anglo-Iranian Oil Company, saw relations further deteriorate after the 1979 Iranian Revolution, which saw an Iran heavily influenced by conservative Islamic movements and an outspoken leader in Ayatollah Khomeini.

The Iran-Iraq War of 1980-88 was the first instance in which the US and Iran became increasingly hostile towards each other. The US, alongside many other Western nations, backed the more secular Saddam Hussein and his Iraqi forces, while Iran, seeing the conflict as an expression of Sunni/Shi’a divide, supported Iraq’s insurgency.

Over the next few decades, the tensions between the US and Iran only escalated, primarily due to their opposing policies in developing a nuclear weapon. Iran claims that its ambitions are for energy and medical purposes and backs this statement up by citing US intelligence claims from a 2007 National Intelligence Estimate; the US, however, has consistently held the stance that the Iranians are attempting to develop nuclear arms for offensive purposes and has used this to justify economic and military sanctions as well as the termination of the 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA).

Understanding Iranian Nuclear Proliferation

One of the main issues at the heart of the US-Iran conflict lies in the proliferation of nuclear programs. The Iranian Nuclear Proliferation Problem refers to the potential development of nuclear weapons by Tehran. In the past, the United States has provided numerous economic incentives and security assurances in order to encourage the Iranian government to stop its nuclear weapons program, but these have had limited success.

The international community’s concern over Iranian nuclear proliferation is further exacerbated by the fact that Iran is enriching uranium, a key ingredient in the production of nuclear warheads. In January 2006, Iran announced that it would resume its uranium enrichment program, and in November of that same year, the UN Security Council passed a resolution demanding that Iran suspend its program.

There is an important distinction between the US’s stance on proliferation and the actions that Iran has taken to date. Whereas the US is looking to prevent nuclear proliferation and impose sanctions for any violations, Iran has continuously denied any attempts to acquire nuclear weapons and insists that its activities are for peaceful energy and medical usage. Thus, Iranian propaganda claims that the US sanctions are an unjustified tool for oppression and subordination.

Implications of Nuclear Proliferation

The proliferation of nuclear weapons in Iran holds the potential to dramatically shift the balance of power in the Middle East region. Its implications, both direct and indirect, could bring about catastrophic consequences for the region and ultimately, the world.

For instance, if Iran were to acquire nuclear weapons, it may embolden extremist groups across the region, who are already actively preparing for the end of US support. Such movements could become further empowered through Iranian-backing, which would encourage further regional turmoil and potentially, make rounds of civil war more likely.

In addition, if Iran successfully developed a nuclear arsenal, it is possible that other countries in the region, such as Saudi Arabia, may pursue the same path. This would result in an arms race, driving up the cost of resources, upsetting the geopolitical balance and perpetuating a cycle of violence.

Steps to Reduce the Risk of Conflict

Despite the potentially destructive implications of the rising tensions between the United States and Iran, it is important to remember that a conflict does not necessarily need to occur in order to achieve the desired objectives of both parties. If a conflict does emerge, it can be minimized, though a methodical and deliberate approach should be taken by the international community.

First, dialogue between the two countries must be encouraged. There must be a sincere effort taken by all sides to understand the interests and grievances of each other and to engage in dialogue as a way to build trust. This dialogue should include both direct talks as well as talks hosted by third parties, including major European allies.

Second, a new, comprehensive agreement should be sought. Negotiations have proven to be a successful means of resolving many of the issues between the two countries and a fresh start should be sought, which would include Iran ending its nuclear enrichment program.

Third, the international community, and particularly the United States, should reassess the efficacy of their sanctions programs. Sanctions are intended to force the hand of the target country and ultimately, should pressure them into desirable behavior. However, typically, countries such as Iran have shown an unwillingness to respond positively to such economic and military retribution. Hence, a revisitation of sanctions should be conducted to ensure that they are not counter-productive and that they are “smart sanctions” and are not hurting the most vulnerable population.

Finally, the international community should urge the two countries to lean heavily towards diplomacy. A potential conflict should be at the least, a last resort, as war and military intervention is often destructive and costly. Exhausting all peaceful remedies via diplomacy should be the preset narrative.

The US-Iran conflict with regards to Iranian nuclear proliferation is a complex and delicate issue, which carries a high risk of escalation. However, if the international community can come together and agree upon a constructive set of steps, then it is possible that a conflict can be avoided. Dialogue, negotiations, and smart sanctions should be the primary tools used to alleviate the tensions and to mitigate the risk of conflict. It is now up to the US, Iran, and their allies to make the appropriate measures and to finally, navigate through the fog of war.