Following the U.S.-backed Israeli regime’s bombing of the Iranian consulate in Damascus, Iranians affiliated with the Islamic Republic have made statements that suggest Tehran’s nuclear weapons policy may have shifted. A 180° shift by Tehran is highly-probable.
Iran’s Nuclear Status
Iran was a latent nuclear power (‘a screwdriver’s turn from a bomb’) on 7 Oct. After 7 Oct, the IAEA reported that Iran had tripled its monthly yield of 60% ‘Highly-Enriched Uranium’ (HEU). On 10 February 2024, IAEA reported that ‘Iran’s total enriched uranium stockpile was at 5,525.5 kilograms (ca. 12,182 lbs.), an increase of 1,038.7 kilograms (2,289 lbs.) since the last quarterly report in November 2023.’ Breakout from 60% to 90% HEU is a ‘matter of days’ (enrichment from 60% to 90% is not linear). Nuclear warhead design is 80-year-old technology. If North Koreans, Indians, and Paks could build warheads in short order, Iranian scientists can, too. IRGC Aerospace has the ballistic missile arsenal to deliver nuclear warheads.
Fatwa (jurisprudential responsa)
The stated reason for not assembling the discrete components is that nuclear weapons were haram (forbidden) by Islamic law. Refusal by Iran to assemble bombs is based on a fatwa holding that offensive use of a nuclear bomb is unlawful because it indiscriminately kills civilians. But if the question is re-phrased, the answer changes. For example, Q: ‘Is it lawful to possess nuclear weapons for defensive purposes because Israelis are nucking futs?’ A: ‘Yes, because a nuke is a deterrent that will protect Iranian civilians from being indiscriminately killed by U.S.-backed sociopaths.’
Public Statements
Two comments that shaped my thinking. First is a TV interview with Mahmoud Reza Aghamiri, professor of nuclear physics and president of Shahid Beheshti University. That the status of nuclear weapons is being discussed publicly today is telling. The second is a tweet by Mr. Mahdi Mohammadi, an Iranian national security analyst of high standing.
1. Prof. Aghamiri
Interviewer: ‘According to the fatwa of the leader of the revolution, the construction of an atomic bomb is […] haram in a legal sense. But some say that this weapon may have a defensive feature. What is the overall idea in the country now? If they hurt us a lot, will we go towards the construction of an atomic bomb …?’
Prof. Aghamiri: ‘[Discursive answer] If the situation changes and the rule of jurisprudence of the leader of the revolution changes, then we have the ability to build our bomb’ [NB: Free AI subtitles are dodgy]
2. Mr. Mohammadi
‘For any rational actor, there is a point where cost-benefit calculations suddenly change, and strategies are re-written from scratch. For Iran, the Damascus attack was that point.’
Analysis
Mr. Mohammadi is right. He was not necessarily referring to the nuclear program, but the Damascus attack, and the reactions of Israel’s western backers (U.S., UK, DE, FR, etc.), will have changed Iranian strategies. Tehran would be wise to revise its nuclear weapons policy ‘from scratch.’ U.S., UK, and FR did not condemn Israel at the UNSC for violating the 1961 Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations. Western states did not condemn Israel; however, a stream of western foreign ministers called Iran’s FM begging Iran not to retaliate—although Iran has the unambiguous right under international law to retaliate. The blame for ‘escalation’ is being laid on Tehran. Furthermore, the events of the past six months prove that not only will the ‘collective west’ refuse to condemn Israel’s gratuitous use of violence against hospitals, mosques, churches, schools, and homes, and indiscriminate slaughter of non-combatants in Gaza, they will (1) offer Israel diplomatic cover at the UN; (2) supply Israel with the weapons used to kill, burn, and bomb women and children; (3) allow Israel to starve Gazans; and (4) have Western media—court stenographers and/or propagandists—lie to cover for Israel. State stenographers-propagandists have taken to ‘blaming the victim’ w.r.t. to massacres in Gaza, and bombing of the Iranian consulate. ‘Iran had it coming’ is their story. If Israel uses nuclear weapons on Iran’s nuclear sites at Natanz and Ferdows, stenographers-propagandists, diplomats, and politicians will blame Iran: ‘Iran had it coming.’ A ‘rational actor,’ therefore, must take into account the mountain of evidence accumulated over six months that (a) double-standards dominate in western capitals; (b) the ‘international order’ is broken; (c) western leaders have adopted an ‘anything goes’ policy w.r.t. Israel.
My gut feeling is that Ayatollah Khameniʾi had his ‘Road to Damascus’ moment on 1 April 2024.
Perspectives 