WITH each increasing provocative incident such as the exposition of the new hi-tech uranium enrichment mechanism, Iran’s President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, supported by the Revolutionary Guards, takes another step towards world isolation and ultimately possible military confrontation with the United States, its allies and partners.

A new round of stronger sanctions against Iran is in progress at the UN Security Council, with China in attendance prepared to participate in the discussions, but so far it is not clear if China would be prepared to cast its vote in favour of tougher sanctions. While China remains adamant that diplomacy should be used to resolve the impasse, and after numerous failures of diplomacy to resolve the issue of Iran’s uranium enrichment programme, members of the Security Council appear sceptical about China’s persistence along the diplomatic path. If consensus on tougher sanctions again proves elusive, then independent countries would be free to apply their own sanctions, if desired. The Obama administration continues to offer an opportunity for Iran to discuss the issue of its uranium enrichment programme, but so far only inflammatory and derisive public rhetoric have been heard from President Ahmadinejad.

As with similar reports, it is necessary “to read between the lines” of the US April 2010 Nuclear Posture Review Report (NPR) to discover the true direction of the policy under review. To determine the central policy theme being formulated, it is essential to consider the strategic elements treated in the Report as a whole, to arrive at the “end game” being recommended. In his April 2009 speech in Prague, President Obama highlighted 21st century nuclear dangers, declaring that to overcome these grave and growing threats, the United States will “seek the peace and security of a world without nuclear weapons”. The language check here is “overcome these grave and growing threats” indicating the proximity and extreme seriousness of the threats emanating primarily from Iran and North Korea infused with danger from Al Qaeda worldwide.

The NPR focused on steps to be taken in the next five to 10 years and observes that “the threat of global nuclear war has become remote, but the risk of nuclear attack has increased”. The NPR confirms: “Concerns have grown in recent years that we are approaching a nuclear tipping point — that unless today’s dangerous trends are arrested and reversed, before very long we will be living in a world with a steadily growing number of nuclear-armed states and an increasing likelihood of terrorists getting their hands on nuclear weapons.”

In achieving these goals, the US places great importance on the New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (New START) recently concluded with Russia. Forthwith “US strategic forces — comprised of submarine launched ballistic missiles (SLBMs), intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs), and nuclear-capable heavy bombers — continue to underwrite deterrence of nuclear attack against the United States our allies and partners”. These three strike formations, known as the Triad, would form the delivery mechanisms with the capacity to integrate in the event of unexpected technological problems or operational vulnerabilities while supporting strategic stability through an assured second-strike capability.

During the 10-year duration of New (START), the nuclear Triad of ICBMs-450 silo-based Minuteman, SLBMs-14 Ohio-class submarines and 76 B52H heavy bombers and 18 B-2 bombers that can be equipped with nuclear weapons and to be forward deployed, will signal US resolve and commitment in crisis. It is noteworthy that “no changes to extended deterrence capabilities will be made without continued close consultation with allies and partners”. It could be presumed that such consultations would take place in the event of a US pre-emptive strike considered essential for the preservation of national security.

US forces are already forward deployed in key regions around the world, in addition to their engagement in Iraq and Afghanistan. The Middle East is well served by the awesome potential of the Triad formations, without initial use of ground forces, providing the continued presence of extended deterrence in the region. “The US nuclear posture has a vital role to play in regional security architectures. Proliferating states must understand that any attack on the United States, or our allies and partners, will be defeated, and any use of nuclear weapons will be met with a response that would be effective and overwhelming. The president and commander-in-chief will determine the precise nature of any US response. But by pursuing nuclear weapons, such states must understand that they have significantly raised the stakes of any conflict.” This is a strong message for Iran and North Korea, capable of fielding approximately one million armed troops under its command.

In summary, the US has reordered its armed forces and forward deployed selected formations in various key theatres around the world, in preparation for any conflicts which may arise involving the national security of the United States, its allies and partners. If Iran continues along its present course and develops a nuclear weapon, the consequences are clear and the same applies to North Korea. Russia’s support for these strategies seems to have been secured, but China is yet to commit to the concept of nuclear deterrence to be applied by other measures, after diplomacy has failed to convince the offending state to desist from raising the danger level higher, while bordering on confrontation. The US Nuclear Posture Review is a source of comfort to non-nuclear states and those smaller economies that are incapable of defending themselves against nuclear threat. From that view it is truly meritorious.