Iran proclaims itself "a nuclear country" after declaring it has enriched uranium to a level used in power stations. The announcement comes amid reports that U.S. policymakers are weighing the option of using military force to prevent Tehran from developing nuclear weapons.
International policymakers face a host of unattractive options in their desire to confound Iran’s nuclear ambitions, experts at a three-part CFR symposium said this week. U.S. and European diplomats insist they remain committed to negotiations, but privately sound increasingly grim about the prospects for diplomacy.
The diplomatic stalemate over Iran’s nuclear ambitions continues, splitting experts between those who want to begin planning for a world with a nuclear-armed Iran, and those who see military action as a way of preventing it.
The UN Security Council is trying to agree on the proper course of action toward Iran's nuclear program. Despite the myriad proposed strategies for dealing with Tehran, continued negotiations seem most likely.
Talks aimed at defusing North Korea's nuclear arsenal disintegrated into name-calling after the last round ended in September. While negotiations halted, proliferation has not. So what will it take to move the process forward?
With international diplomacy fixed on Iran's nuclear ambitions, Israel's nuclear arsenal has been drawn into the debate. Tensions between Iran and Israel are complicating efforts to prevent further proliferation of nuclear weapons in the region.
Amid intensifying diplomacy in the Iranian nuclear crisis, there are doubts about the capacity of the international community to influence Tehran's actions. The transfer of the issue to the UN Security Council may not offer much hope for defusing the situation, some experts say.
The IAEA debates whether to refer Iran to the UN Security Council over its nuclear program. President Bush says the world must not allow Iran to have nuclear weapons, while Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad says his country will never give up its right to nuclear energy.
Key states are coalescing behind the Russian proposal to enrich uranium fuel from Iran as the Board of Governors of the International Atomic Energy Agency prepares to meet in a special session on the issue. But Iran's response has been mixed and support for coercive measures against Tehran is uncertain.
Iran's nuclear gambit rumbles on, with an emergency meeting of the IAEA now scheduled for February 2. Efforts by Tehran to avoid referral to the UN Security Council are being rebuffed by Europe and the United States, who meanwhile are seeking to assure a nervous Russia that no confrontation is imminent.
Where’s Kim Jong-Il? The whereabouts of the reclusive North Korean leader prompted intense speculation this week, and reports placed him from Shanghai to Manchuria to Siberia. He turned up finally in Beijing.
Frank Klotz explores the role of history in the Pakistani nuclear program and the challenges for the future in his review of Feroz Hassan Khan's recently released Eating Grass: The Making of the Pakistani Bomb.
In the past, U.S. officials have been less than eager to define a specific redline for the Iranian threat. While setting a March deadline could provide more certainty and coercive leverage to compel Iran to cooperate with the IAEA, it also places U.S. "credibility" on the line, says Micah Zenko.
Author: Frank G. Klotz Council on Foreign Relations
Frank G. Klotz argues that both India and Pakistan have an interest in taking steps to enhance strategic stability in the region and to reduce the possibility of nuclear conflict resulting from miscalculation or deliberate escalation in a crisis.
Authors: Ray Takeyh and Suzanne Maloney International Affairs
Ray Takeyh and Suzanne Maloney say that despite decades of struggling under punitive financial measures, Iran has persisted with its objectionable policies, ranging from terrorism to proliferation of weapons of mass destruction.
Authors: Kenneth M. Pollack and Ray Takeyh The Washington Quarterly
Kenneth M. Pollack and Ray Takeyh state, ""... it is time to appreciate that the only manner of inducing meaningful change in the Islamic Republic's behavior without the resort to war is to otherwise imperil its very existence."
The Council on Foreign Relations' David Rockefeller Studies Program—CFR's "think tank"—is home to more than seventy full-time, adjunct, and visiting scholars and practitioners (called "fellows"). Their expertise covers the world's major regions as well as the critical issues shaping today's global agenda. Download the printable CFR Experts Guide.
The authors argue that the United States has responded inadequately to the rise of Chinese power and recommend placing less strategic emphasis on the goal of integrating China into the international system and more on balancing China's rise.
Campbell evaluates the implications of the Boko Haram insurgency and recommends that the United States support Nigerian efforts to address the drivers of Boko Haram, such as poverty and corruption, and to foster stronger ties with Nigerian civil society.
Koblentz argues that the United States should work with other nuclear-armed states to manage threats to nuclear stability in the near term and establish processes for multilateral arms control efforts over the longer term.
Learn more about CFR’s mission and its work over the past year in the 2014 Annual Report. The Annual Report spotlights new initiatives, high-profile events, and authoritative scholarship from CFR experts, and includes a message from CFR President Richard N. Haass. Read and download »