AEI has examined policies that aim to halt Iran's march toward nuclear weapons. In May, AEI Senior Fellow John Bolton discussed how the Brazil-Turkey nuclear fuel deal further assisted progress towards an Iranian nuclear weapons program in May. Also that month, AEI Vice President for Foreign and Defense Policy Studies Danielle Pletka argued in testimony that Congress must take a more assertive position in determining the specifics of U.S. sanctions on Iran, and not rely solely upon the administration to oversee their implementation. Following the passage of UN sanctions in June, AEI's Critical Threats Project began tracking the effect of sanctions upon Iran, and AEI Resident Fellow Ali Alfoneh wrote on how sanctions could more effectively target Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps. AEI has also discussed the regional perception of Iran’s nuclear rise. On August 13, Critical Threats Project Senior Analyst Charlie Szrom published an article highlighting Arab public opinion has likely not warmed to an Iranian nuclear weapon, despite a recent poll to the contrary.

Other AEI scholars have examined what a nuclear-armed Iran would look like. Resident Scholar Michael Rubin argued in a June speech that Iran will be an increasingly ideological and militaristic power by the year 2025; in an August 15 article, Rubin argued that a nuclear weapon would further empower the IRGC within Iran. Resident Scholar Frederick Kagan, in a May paper, has argued that it is impossible to determine whether a nuclear-armed Iran, under the current leadership or any subsequent regime, can be deterred, and that a comparison with Cold War containment policy is inapt.

Photo Credit: UN Photo/Marco Castro