FRAMING THE INQUIRY

A deepening global crisis centers on efforts of Western countries led by the United States and spearheaded by Israel to thwart Iran’s alleged efforts to acquire nuclear weaponry. On the one side is Iran’s insistence that its nuclear program is devoted to exercising its rights under international law to develop and acquire the means to produce nuclear energy, coupled with assurances that it has no intention to develop nuclear weapons. On the other side are most influential governments, backed by United Nations sanctions and International Atomic Energy Agency suspicions, that contend that steps must be taken to dissuade Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons by all necessary means and with a sense of urgency. Israel quite openly announces its intention and capabilities to mount an attack on Iran’s nuclear facilities in the event that Iran does not provide convincing reassurance of the non-military character of its nuclear program. Israel’s threat is made against the background of its 1981 attack on the Iraqi reactor at Osirak that supposedly succeeded in derailing Saddam Hussein’s plans to become a nuclear weapons state. The United States has used a more subtle language than Israel, but with a similar resonance, leading the effort to stiffen sanctions, repeatedly indicating its refusal “to take the military option off the table,” and backing up its warning with threatening naval deployments. It is intriguing and revealing that all of the international discussion so far has been focused on how to meet this emerging Iranian threat, and almost no attention has been given to the legality and propriety of the military threats directed at Iran, a sovereign state that is a member of the United Nations and entitled to the protection of international law.