US-Israel War On Iran: Nations Being Compelled To Rethink Nuclear Option

The US - Israeli war of choice on Iran is a lesson being absorbed in capitals around the world. If nuclear  deterrence is the only insurance against regime-threatening strikes, then the logic is simple: acquire it before you need it.

It is a given that had Iran crossed the nuclear threshold, the United States and Israel would not have risked launching co-ordinated strikes on that country . Instead, Tehran’s restraint, rooted in the 2003 fatwa by the late Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei banning nuclear weapons, in hindsight, can be seen as a strategic vulnerability. The late leader wanted Iran to have the nuclear know-how that was used effectively by the scientists to ramp up its nuclear weapon technology without going against the fatwa. Now with Khamenei dead, there are no restrictions on having nuclear weapons.

The contrast with North Korea, which has leveraged its nuclear arsenal into a shield against external adventurism, is being increasingly seen as a smart strategic move. North Korea has survived decades of confrontation with the US, by building  a small but viable nuclear  arsenal that has kept Kim-Jong  Un’s family rule in place.

On the other hand, countries like Libya, whose leader Muammar Gaddafi renounced his nuclear ambitions, were invaded and killed by the West. When the former Soviet Union broke up in 1991 and Ukraine became independent it surrendered its nuclear warheads to Russia. Putin attacked Ukraine in 2022.

Across the world, leaders and security officials are asking the question, does survival mean having a nuclear deterrent?  The non-proliferation regime, built assiduously over several decades by governments and anti-nuclear activists,  is in  danger of crumbling, as governments face the new reality.

  At the heart of the move to restrict nuclear weapons is the Non-Proliferation Treaty, which forbids the spread of nuclear weapons and promotes cooperation in peaceful use of nuclear energy.  The NPT is verified by the Vienna-based International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). The Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT), which restricts the testing of nuclear weapons, the Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG),  as well as nuclear-weapons free zones have all  helped to reduce nuclear proliferation so far.

At the moment there are just nine countries that have nuclear weapons. Russia, US, China, France and UK are the five permanent members of the UN Security Council with nuclear arms.  India, Pakistan, North Korea and Israel also have nuclear weapons. Unlike the others, Israel does not publicly acknowledge it possesses nuclear weapons, but it is an open secret, never discussed by the West.

 India's first nuclear test was in 1974, under Prime Minister Indira Gandhi. It held another series of tests in 1998, soon after Atal Bihari Vajpayee became Prime Minister. The world came down like a ton of bricks on India for going nuclear and India was denied access to all western dual-use military equipment and high-tech scientific equipment that could help to advance its nuclear industry. India’s tests were followed immediately by Pakistan. North Korea’s clandestine nuclear programme was assisted by Pakistan and China at one point of time. India was vilified across the non-proliferation space for breaking the rules. However, New Delhi had never been a signatory to either the NPT or the CTBT before it conducted its tests, dubbing them as one-sided treaties that placed nations that already possess nuclear arms at an advantage.

The India-US civil nuclear deal signed by former prime minister Manmohan Singh and US president George Bush, was vehemently opposed by non-proliferation activists in the US and other Western capitals. The phrase ``nuclear Ayatollah’’ was frequently used by Indian diplomats to denounce those opposing New Delhi.

Countries like South Korea, Japan and Australia, have the protection of the US nuclear umbrella.  Some NATO countries are shielded by the US. But under Donald Trump when ties between the US and NATO are testy, many NATO members question whether America can be relied on for help. This is why there is talk in Germany of signing a nuclear pact with France. Not that anything has moved in that direction yet. But the debate is on. In South Korea that lives in the shadow of North Korean nukes, there are many who believe it is time for Seoul to have its own nuclear arsenal instead of relying on the US. Poland’s prime minister Donald Tusk, too, is mulling over a “nuclear umbrella’’ with France. Poland is concerned that Russia may one day threaten Polish sovereignty. Former  Polish president Andrzej Duda previously urged for U.S. nuclear weapons to be based in the country.

Japan, the only country in the world to have two nuclear bombs dropped over Hiroshima and Nagasaki and experienced the full horror and devastating effects for decades,  is committed to never making a nuclear bomb. But today it is debating revising its non-nuclear proliferation principles and contemplating something that is abhorrent to most of its citizens. Prime Minister Takaichi Sanae is raising the possibility of allowing nuclear weapons to enter Japanese territory to protect Japan from Chinese threats. Japan is not planning on acquiring nuclear weapons but mulling over the US placing its nuclear deterrence on its soil.  Saudi Arabia has a defence pact with nuclear-armed Pakistan.

Many other nations are drawing lessons from Iran and debating the nuclear option. This dangerous reassessment could erode decades of non-proliferation norms that has kept the world relatively safe from nuclear weapons.