The Bushehr plant took 35 years to build. In 1974 the West German company, Kraftwerk Union, began work on its construction. Russia has been working on its completion since 1995. The launch of this NPP was repeatedly postponed for a variety of reasons, including the computer network crash that took place in summer 2010. But even the belated launch of the Bushehr plant has become a major success for Iran. The emergence of a fully functioning nuclear power plant means that Tehran has joined the nuclear club of states with closed nuclear fuel cycles.
Some experts explain the unusually muted nature of the U.S. response as evidence of the depletion of their military and economic resources. But this explanation does not stand up to scrutiny. Nowadays, the Pentagon doesnt have any troops to spare for a hypothetical occupation of Iran, in an Afghanistan or Iraq scenario. But it does boast sufficient carrier groups in the Indian Ocean for an air campaign to destroy Iranian nuclear facilities. In 1981, Israel struck a nuclear reactor in Osirak, Iraq, setting the countrys nuclear power program back significantly. The Americans are technically able to organize a re-run of that operation, this time against Iran.
The Iranian threat issue can be used to justify the need for the U.S. anti-ballistic missile (ABM) system in Europe. Washington, of course, could develop this system without making any reference to Iran. But that would make the ABM system look like an explicitly anti-Russian move. Without the mention of Iran the United States would also find it more difficult to negotiate with Moscow on arms control issues and persuade its European allies that there is a genuine need for the ABM complexes to be located on their territory.
Full version of this comment was originally published on www.valdaiclub.com
Some experts explain the unusually muted nature of the U.S. response as evidence of the depletion of their military and economic resources. But this explanation does not stand up to scrutiny. Nowadays, the Pentagon doesnt have any troops to spare for a hypothetical occupation of Iran, in an Afghanistan or Iraq scenario. But it does boast sufficient carrier groups in the Indian Ocean for an air campaign to destroy Iranian nuclear facilities. In 1981, Israel struck a nuclear reactor in Osirak, Iraq, setting the countrys nuclear power program back significantly. The Americans are technically able to organize a re-run of that operation, this time against Iran.
The Iranian threat issue can be used to justify the need for the U.S. anti-ballistic missile (ABM) system in Europe. Washington, of course, could develop this system without making any reference to Iran. But that would make the ABM system look like an explicitly anti-Russian move. Without the mention of Iran the United States would also find it more difficult to negotiate with Moscow on arms control issues and persuade its European allies that there is a genuine need for the ABM complexes to be located on their territory.
Full version of this comment was originally published on www.valdaiclub.com