The Use of Land Power to Counter the Iranian Nuclear Proliferation Challenge
Abstract
Since the 9/11 attacks the United States has declared a policy to stop emerging threats before they become dangerous. President Bush has declared that Iran will not be allowed to develop nuclear weapons, and to prevent Iran from doing so, a number of strategies have been suggested. These strategies include making a diplomatic "Grand Bargain," building a system of containment and deterrence, and using military power to destroy Iran's nuclear infrastructure. In the case of using military power, air strikes are the most frequent recommendation, and the use of land power is largely ignored. If land power were used to destroy Iran's nuclear infrastructure, there are three major options that could be taken: an invasion and occupation, a strategic raid to destroy known nuclear facilities, and a special operations raid to destroy a single nuclear facility. Each ground option would rely on significant air and naval power to be successful. The invasion option is feasible, though with great effort, and it is the most suitable ground option because it provides a certainty of effect that no other course of action can match. However, the invasion option is not acceptable due to its high costs. The strategic raid option is marginally feasible, but the costs are not acceptable and it lacks significant advantage over the pure air option, thus rendering it only marginally suitable. The special operations raid is conditionally an acceptable course of action, but it is neither feasible nor suitable given the lack of intelligence the United States has about Iranian nuclear facilities and the limited effect a special operations raid would have on a large industrial target.
Document Details
- Document Type
- Technical Report
- Publication Date
- Jun 15, 2007
- Accession Number
- ADA471463
Entities
People
- Bruce W. Terry
Organizations
- United States Army Command and General Staff College