Experts: Israeli strikes on Iran could accelerate nuclear armament

Shafaq News/ James Acton, co-director of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, has warned that any Israeli attack on Iran’s nuclear facilities could push Tehran to accelerate its production of nuclear weapons.

In an interview with Yedioth Ahronoth, Acton explained that "such an attack would likely increase Iran’s determination to develop nuclear weapons rather than deter it."

Acton pointed out that unlike the nuclear reactors Israel targeted in Iraq in 1981 and Syria in 2007, Iran relies on centrifuges to enrich uranium, explaining that "in response to an attack, Iran could relocate its facilities deeper underground or spread its centrifuges across civilian industrial sites, making them harder to detect. This could force Israel into a cycle of repeated strikes every year or two to maintain its military advantage."

Acton also highlighted that "Israel might require the US-developed Massive Ordnance Penetrator (MOP) bomb to target fortified sites like Fordow. However, even if the US were to provide the bomb, using it would require American logistical and military support."

Experts warn that an attack on Iran could lead to a definitive decision by Tehran to produce a nuclear weapon. Acton emphasized, "Such an attack makes it highly likely that Iran would decide to develop a nuclear weapon."

He added that Iran’s acquisition of nuclear weapons could embolden it to take more aggressive actions, such as attacking Israel or targeting civilians with missiles, and increase its support for regional proxies like Hezbollah.

Both Acton and Professor Hooshang Amirahmadi, President of the American Iranian Council, agreed that diplomacy remains the best option. US officials also favor this route to avoid military escalation.

In June 2024, US Secretary of State Antony Blinken stated that Iran could potentially produce enough fissile material for a nuclear weapon within a week or two. However, Blinken clarified that Iran would still need to take additional steps to turn that material into a functional nuclear weapon.

Despite the US withdrawal from the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) in 2018, Acton sees a possibility for a new, albeit less comprehensive, agreement. He also cautioned that "abandoning diplomacy could become more likely if Donald Trump were to return to power." On the other hand, if Kamala Harris were to become president, Acton believes she might be "more inclined to pursue a deal, though it may not be a top priority."

Amirahmadi suggested another approach, i.e., targeting Iran’s oil infrastructure. He argued that "such an attack could have a more significant impact than hitting its nuclear program, potentially crippling Iran’s economy and leading to regime change." However, he warned that such a move could spiral out of control, stating, "If that happens, Iran may become unmanageable."