Can Iran's nuclear activities be thwarted?

"Preventing nuclear war arguably is the most important arena in which universal compliance is needed. This standard must apply not only to Iran, but to the U.S. and other nations."

IRAN'S NUCLEAR ACTIVITIES are worrisome and pose a potential threat to regional and international security. The Tehran government has failed to cooperate fully with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). The country has ended its previous suspension of nuclear activities and is proceeding with the development of uranium enrichment technology. Convincing this nation to refrain from developing nuclear weapons is an important security objective. The crisis should be resolved through diplomacy, however, not punitive sanctions or the use of military force. An overly confrontational approach will be counterproductive. The U.S. and its partners should combine the threat of sanctions with the offer of substantial incentives through an engagement strategy that reinforces popular Iranian strivings for reform, economic development, and cooperation with the West.

There is no doubt that the danger from a nuclear-armed Iran would be grave, but it is important to distinguish between rhetoric and actual capabilities. There still is ample time to develop an effective strategy for preventing the nuclearization of Iran. The U.S. government's National Intelligence Estimate has concluded that it will take 10 years for Iran to acquire the capability to build atomic weapons. Israeli officials told The New York Times that Iran might be able to produce a bomb in four or five years. Whatever the exact time frame, it is clear that Tehran does not, at present, pose a nuclear threat.

Iran faces many technical hurdles in attempting to manufacture enough fissile material for a bomb. It will take years to learn the technology and construct the facilities required for the enrichment of sufficient weapons-grade uranium. Iran is nowhere near having the kind of large-scale enrichment effort involving tens of thousands of centrifuges that would be needed to secure a bomb.

As long as Iran remains a part of the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), international inspectors will have access to the country's nuclear facilities and can report on nonproliferation violations. Under these conditions, any effort to begin producing weapons grade uranium or developing actual weapons capabilities would be known well in advance, giving international officials plenty of warning and opportunity for response. The goal of U.S. and international strategy should be to keep Iran within the NPT system while developing a way to persuade the nation to refrain from nuclear weapons development.

Because Iran falsified earlier nuclear declarations and reneged on previous nonproliferation pledges, the U.S. wants to increase pressure on the regime. America is on the fight track in seeking to cooperate with the European states, Russia, China, and other major players and in working through the IAEA and the United Nations Security Council to reach this objective.

The U.S. is urging the Security Council to consider the imposition of economic sanctions, but it is important to recognize the lessons from earlier such cases. Past experience suggests that coercive measures sometimes produce a rally-around-the-flag effect. Overly forceful sanctions toward Iran might strengthen the hand of hard-line groups and the extremist leadership of Pres. Mahmoud Ahmedinejad while undermining the position of Iranians who favor nuclear compromise with the West. Iran has threatened to expel international inspectors and withdraw from the NPT if UN sanctions are imposed. This may be a bluff, intended to prevent or delay IAEA and UN action, but it is a risk that diplomats must take seriously as they weigh their options.

The threat of sanctions often is useful as a way of prompting a bargaining process, but it is important for the U.S. and its allies to recognize the limitations. There is no support in the international community right now for an oil embargo or general trade sanctions. The only measures the Security Council even will consider are "smart sanctions"--targeted measures aimed exclusively at Iranian leaders. These would include the freezing of the financial assets of designated Iranian elites and entities, a selective ban on travel, and an embargo on arms and weapons-related technology.

A Security Council decision to undertake such measures would signal international opposition to Iran's development of nuclear weapons and reinforce the political norm against proliferation. It also could be a step toward more vigorous measures in the future if the regime refuses to cooperate.

While selective sanctions would have diplomatic merit, there should be no illusion that such measures alone will be sufficient to prompt compliance with international norms. News reports suggest that Iran is moving financial assets out of Western banks in anticipation of potential sanctions. The U.S. has had comprehensive economic and technological sanctions in place against Iran for more than 25 years and these have not prevented the regime from acquiring nuclear capabilities.