- New Issue
- Books & Reviews
- About Us
Kroenig advances a serious, but not entirely convincing, argument in favor of a U.S. strike on Iran’s nuclear facilities: the United States has the military capability to destroy all known Iranian nuclear facilities without committing any ground troops to the task.
Much has changed after the past several months of diplomacy with Iran, but one basic fact hasn’t: diplomacy remains unlikely to neutralize the threat from Tehran's nuclear program. A truly comprehensive diplomatic settlement between Iran and the West is still the best possible outcome, but there is little reason to believe that one can be achieved.
On March 1 at the Council on Foreign Relations in New York, Foreign Affairs Managing Editor Jonathan Tepperman moderated a debate on the threats posed by Iran -- and how the United States should respond -- featuring authors Matthew Kroenig and Colin Kahl.
Opponents of military action against Iran assume a U.S. strike would be far more dangerous than simply letting Tehran build a bomb. Not so, argues this former Pentagon defense planner. With a carefully designed attack, Washington could mitigate the costs and spare the region and the world from an unacceptable threat.