Iran and North Korea are simultaneously and significantly escalating their nuclear threat programs. Their action portends two rising national security crises as the 2020 campaign heats up.
Iran’s action this week centers on its reactivation of uranium enrichment centrifuges at the Fordow nuclear facility. Buried inside a mountain, the facility poses a special threat in its reduced visibility to intelligence efforts and hardened position against prospective military strikes. Fordow’s reactivation follows other Iranian nuclear threats this summer.
And in a sign of Iran’s declining cooperation with the International Atomic Energy Agency, the regime also temporarily detained and then expelled an IAEA inspector this week. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo on Thursday warned that these steps suggest Iran’s preparation for a near-term nuclear breakout. That breakout would very likely allow Iran to produce a nuclear weapon within a 12-month period. Something, Pompeo said, that the United States “will never allow.”
Regional context is also king here. Iran’s penchant for new hostility is fueled by its anguish over rising protests against its influence in Iraq and Lebanon. The regime wants to present a message of resolve. But if Iran decides to breakout toward a nuclear weapon, President Trump will have to choose between two unpleasant options: either accepting an Iranian nuclear force or conducting a high-intensity naval blockade. If that blockade failed to alter Iran’s calculus, Trump would have to go back to square one or launch air and missile strikes across Iran. The U.S. would find few allies to support that effort; Britain being the most likely, perhaps also with France.
Then there’s North Korea. True to the ominous symbolism in dictator Kim Jong Un’s horse ride last month, North Korea is preparing for new long-range missile tests. The problem? Any long-range test would shred the Trump-Kim peace process, sending us back to the dark days of 2017 and even more hyperbolic threats. And if that missile test occurs, Trump will likely see it as a personal betrayal. Similar to Iran, it would force the president to choose between accepting one of two options: either acquiescing to North Korea’s ability to destroy American cities or launching a blockade aimed at crippling Kim’s economy. And again, if that blockade were to fail, we’re left with preemptive strikes against Pyongyang’s ballistic missile program.
So, what should Trump do?
Well, tempering the most hawkish elements in his administration, Trump should stick firmly to his realistic diplomacy. That diplomacy can still earn dividends with both Iran and North Korea. But Trump must expedite his diplomacy with urgency. It is now no longer sufficient to talk about confidence building. Trump must make clear to Tehran and Pyongyang that American patience is running thin, and the U.S. military is ready to act if needed.
