New Iran Nuclear Gambit Threatens West
The Iranians are in the process of doubling their capacity to enrich uranium. What can be done to counter this provocative move?
On April 8th, Iran’s National Day of Nuclear Technology, President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad declared that Iranian scientists were “putting 6,000 new centrifuges into place”. This statement indicates that Iran will be adding another 3,000 centrifuges to the 3,000 already installed and declared to the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).
Ahamidnejad went on to say that Iranian scientists were testing a new type of centrifuge that works five times faster the P1 centrifuges which Iran is already operating.
The Iranian president could be boasting. Some analysts, such as those close to the IAEA, said today that Iran is having enough difficulties operating its current 3,000 centrifuges. Therefore its unlikely that Iran could install and run more.
This may be a valid assumption. With the economy in the doldrums, and presidential elections approaching, Ahmadinejad needs all the prestige he can muster to boost his falling popularity.
Furthermore, the Iranian government has recently asked the Americans to start new negotiations over Iraq. By making its nuclear program look more advanced than it is, Ahmadinejad, and his boss Ayatollah Khamenei, may be hoping that this could translate into a stronger bargaining position for Tehran at the negotiating table.
However, one must not also rule out the possibility that Ahmadinejad is telling the truth. Telling a lie of this proportion could be a severe embarrassment for the president, as such claims will have to be substantiated during IAEA’s future inspections to Iran’s nuclear facilities.
If they can not be substantiated, not only would such claims make the Iranian president look like a liar, it could also lead to further suspicion that despite the NIE report, Iran is running a secret nuclear program.
With sanctions failing to deter the Iranian government, as far as Iran’s supreme leader is concerned, nothing — apart from technical difficulties — could halt Iran’s march to nuclear glory. Luckily for Ahmadinejad, when it comes to the nuclear program, he has the full backing of the supreme leader, who has the final word over such matters.
This should make the leaders of the Western world very worried. With the situation in Gaza and Lebanon worsening every day, such confidence shown by Iran could translate into major outbreak of violence in those troubled areas.
This could push Sunni countries into the direction of developing their own nuclear programs. Furthermore, concerned by Iran’s expanding influence in Iraq and their growing belligerence in the Middle East, Sunni countries could continue or even increase their financial support to Sunni fighters in Iraq, as Saudi Arabia has been doing. In such a case the US could forget about total withdrawal from Iraq within the next year, or even two, no matter what Democrats promise to American voters.
Although the US seems hopeless in its efforts to bring international consensus against Iran in the UN, there is nevertheless one area which Washington could hurt Iran’s regional drive: Iraq.
The American government must listen to General Petraeus’s recommendation that US troop withdrawals from Iraq should be suspended. The current US advances in bringing more security to Iraq is one of the reasons why Iran recently decided to request more talks with Washington. To lose this advantage could mean losing one of the only means of leverage America has against Iran.
If anything, more troops are needed for Iraq. However, this seems unlikely as the mounting casualties have left the US population with little appetite to send more of their sons to war.
Instead of this, more money should be pumped into Iraq’s reconstruction projects as a means of increasing America’s position in Iraq and decreasing Iran’s clout. And the money does not have to only come from the US. America could pressure the Saudis into redirecting some of their current assistance to insurgents, into reconstruction projects in Iraq.
In absence of more troops, increased economic welfare for Iraqis could reduce Iran’s influence in Iraq thus forcing Ayatollah Khamenei and his soldier Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to rethink their current belligerent strategy.
For now, Iran is clearly the winner. Its nuclear program and influence in the region is moving forward. It seems unlikely that the international community could do much to halt its nuclear drive. However, Tehran’s regional influence is more susceptible to pressures and challenges. Unless this weak spot is exploited, the West could soon be looking at a regional nuclear super power whose president is not shy to publicly doubt September 11th and its 3000 victims.
Meir Javedanfar is the co-author of The Nuclear Sphinx of Tehran – Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and the State of Iran. He runs Middle East Economic and Political Analysis (MEEPAS).
![]() |
![]() |
Podcasts | PJM Home |





PJM Home


Pajamas Media appreciates your comments that abide by the following guidelines:
1. Avoid profanities or foul language unless it is contained in a necessary quote or is relevant to the comment.
2. Stay on topic.
3. Disagree, but avoid ad hominem attacks.
4. Threats are treated seriously and reported to law enforcement.
5. Spam and advertising are not permitted in the comments area.
The clause regarding "hate speech" has been deleted because readers criticized it as being too loosely defined. We agreed.
These guidelines are very general and cannot cover every possible situation. Please don't assume that Pajamas Media management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment. We reserve the right to filter or delete comments or to deny posting privileges entirely at our discretion. If you feel your comment was filtered inappropriately, please email us at story@pajamasmedia.com.
12 Comments
1. jvon:“Mounting casualties?” I don’t know what numbers you are looking at, but the rate at which US troops are wounded or killed has dropped off rather sharply in recent months. (Shortly after the surge began.)
Apr 10, 2008 - 1:52 am 2. j green:Iran has been forced to reorganize it surrogates nd proxies in Iraq. They are not the clear winners, neither abroad in Iraq or at home with their economy.
Nonetheless your outcome of needing to increase the troops or at worse delay any pull-back is right on. You don’t stop doing something when its working, you either maintain it or, ideally, intensify it.
Apr 10, 2008 - 2:20 am 3. tolerantatheist:Liberals never exercise any logic whatsoever.
Casualties can only mount, or stay the same. They can hardly reduce. The casualty rate is a whole other matter.
Apr 10, 2008 - 2:25 am 4. j green:Also, purely as a technical matter, by definition there is no such a thing as a regional superpower, but point well taken. Iran is actually losing on some fronts and that only makes them a much more desparate enemy which means they are more dangerous than ever.
Apr 10, 2008 - 2:28 am 5. Iran » Blog Archive » New Iran Nuclear Gambit Threatens West:[...] Meir Javedanfar wrote an interesting post today on New Iran Nuclear Gambit Threatens WestHere’s a quick excerptThe Iranians are in the process of doubling their capacity to enrich uranium. What can be done to counter this provocative move? [...]
Apr 10, 2008 - 3:22 am 6. Sophie:If Obama got into power the situation could change dramatically. Here’s an interesting article about it: http://observers.france24.com/en/content/20080409-obama-iran-talk-ahmadinejad-banisadr
Apr 10, 2008 - 6:02 am 7. Jules Crittenden » Reality Checks:[...] In other Iranian business, Meir Javedanfar at Pajamas, New Iranian Nuclear Gambit Threatens West. [...]
Apr 10, 2008 - 6:38 am 8. Randi "Three-fingers" Rhodes:Mr. Javedanfar, strictly speaking, Iran is neither a regional power, nor a continent.
It’s a county, just like Egypt. The entire region is located in the beautiful country of Africa, adjacent to the shores of Lake Atlantic.
I know it’s a technical point, but it’s important to gett your facts straight. Especially for us journalists.
Because we have standards, don’t we?
Apr 10, 2008 - 11:55 am 9. NOSEY:Is this the real reason G. E. and NEI are making plans for 29 new nuclear plants to be built? The logic of nuclear being a cleaner power source is not sinking in on me, but as I read more about the Nuclear industry wanting to start back up I realize there may be more at stake than clean air. Could I be right since I am just guessing? I know the costs of going to nuclear energy would be overwhelming and maybe there is more to the story then power plants to generate energy for the masses.
Apr 10, 2008 - 4:45 pm 10. Miriam:Meir – this is a technical point, but in the U.S.A, as well as in your country (of residence if not origin) Israel, the daughters go to war, not just the sons. This may seem like a nitpicking point of semantics, but it is not to anyone whose children (daughters included) are sacrificing themselves and in harms way.
Apr 11, 2008 - 9:41 am 11. John Samford:Nosey, Nuclear power stations are CHEAP, so long as you don’t have Anti-Nuke types jacking up the cost with regulatory restrictions. In Iran, the anti-nuke protesters get a bullet in the back of the head which tends to hold down the regulatory cost of a nuclear plant.
Apr 11, 2008 - 6:41 pm 12. Stefcho:Did you know that the US Navy owns dozens of nuclear power plants? Non of them are subject to the NRC and together they cost less then one land based power plant to build and operate. Not only that, but ALL nuclear powered navy ships have an outlet so they can be used to power a city in an emergency.
IIRC, one was used at New Orleans after Katrina, although I could be wrong about that.
Ahmadinejad is a religious fanatic. This is the guy who claims that Allah shined holy light onto him during his speech at the UN (and he believes it).
This guy thinks his actions – deliberately threatening Israel with destruction – will cause the return of the 12th Imam (Islamic Messiah)…
You can sand as many negotiators as you like, it won’t stop Iran arming for Nuclear warfare – and when they have the weapons they will use them.
If you buy the idea that Iran wants nuclear facilities for civilian use then you should ask yourself why they are simultaneously building long-range missle sites… not very useful for defence.
Apr 13, 2008 - 2:31 pm