Iran Says It Won't Budge on Nuclear Program

We've been waiting for the release of a UN report on the Iranian nuclear program. Advanced copies have already been distributed to the security council, and the leaked document indicates that Iran could assemble a nuclear weapon in a matter of months. (Story here). From the story:

Israel and the U.S. have yet to comment on the findings, but France this morning said it is ready to push for sanctions of 'an unprecedented scale' if Iran refuses to answer new questions about its nuclear programme.

I think no one expected less (or more) from France, especially given their involvement in the food for oil scandal. (Actually, I think Europe, as a whole, is rather toothless, but that is an issue for another day).

No comments from other key security council members, either:

China isn't publicly commenting yet on the U.N. assessment in a likely sign that it will wait for Washington and Moscow to signal their intentions. Foreign Ministry spokesman Hong Lei today said that Beijing is studying the report and repeated calls for dialogue and cooperation.

Meanwhile, Iran has taken a defiant tone:

Speaking to supporters in the city of Shahrekord, Ahmadinejad said Iran will not stop its nuclear development, adopting a defiant position against the report, which could spur efforts for new sanctions against his country.

He said: 'If you think you can change the situation of the world through putting pressures on Iran, you are deadly wrong. The Iranian nation will not withdraw an iota.' 

My own thoughts are that Ahmadinejad would welcome an attack on their nuclear facilities for several reasons. First, he has been on the losing end of a power struggle with the ruling clerics in Iran, and an attack (in his view) would probably bolster his position vis-a-vis the clerics, and boost his popularity with Iranians generally. 

Second, it is almost certain that any attack on nuclear facilities would probably be carried out by Israel. (After what happened in Libya, China and Russia will probably not agree to a U.N. resolution authorizing force, and France has already indicated that its preference is for sanctions). Given the Wikileaks documents indicating that Saudi Arabia was willing to acquiesce to Israel using Saudi air space to make any such attack, popular belief in the Middle-East will be that the Saudi's helped out, whether or not they actually do. This is a double-win for Ahmadinejad in that he gains popular support in the Middle-East generally against two of Iran's enemies--Israel and Saudi Arabia.

Third, I believe that Ahmadinejad is not just a believing Muslim, but in many respects a religious zealot. To him, this may be the beginning of the final struggle to destroy Israel and usher in the appearance of the Mahdi and establishment of a new Caliphate (with Iran at its head, of course).

So, the question is whether there will be an attack. For Israel, this is an existential question. If no one else acts decisively, I think that Israel will.

How Europe, Russia and China will act is a more difficult question. None of them have any vested interest in Israel's security. However, Europe and China, at least, do have an interest in oil continuing to flow from the Gulf states, and would want to avoid disruptions to their oil supplies. So, the question is whether they support economic sanctions (which historically have been worse than useless) in the hope that it keeps Israel from attacking; agree to someone taking some forceful action against Iran (which just means that the U.S. expends more blood and treasure, further weakening the U.S. over the short run); or don't do anything and hope that Israel also doesn't do anything? My own guess will be a private agreement on force, but public calls for sanctions and/or diplomatic "solutions."

There is another option, which is that Russia or China actually do something forceful on their own. I'm not holding my breath.