Israel Destroys Iran's Arak Nuclear Reactor

hotair.com

Wowza. 

It's no surprise that Israel has destroyed Iran's Arak nuclear reactor. After all, it was a key element of Iran's program to build nuclear weaponry, and a very vulnerable target. 

Advertisement

The only strategic reason not to attack it was the fact that it could have contained highly radioactive material, and Israel had to balance the benefit of denying its use to Iran against the consequences of releasing dangerous and long-lived radioactive material if the supposedly inactive reactor held fissionable material. 

That was a relatively low risk given the fact that the reactor was supposedly never completed, but it would hardly be shocking if Iran secretly used the site for storage of radioactive material. 

At a minimum, destruction of the facility denies Iran the possibility of its use in the future. 

What IS surprising is that Israel can release footage of the destruction from relatively close on the ground. 

It is a shocking--or would be, before this war began--example of how deeply Israel has penetrated Iran's population. Whether the people filming the strike were Israeli soldiers/spies or local supporters, it suggests that Israel can place people on the ground in some of the most sensitive places in Iran. 

Advertisement

Full @IDF Statement: 

The IAF struck dozens of military targets including an inactive nuclear reactor in the area of Arak

Overnight (Thursday), 40 IAF fighter jets, with the precise intelligence direction of the IDF Intelligence Directorate, struck dozens of military targets in Tehran and additional areas throughout Iran, using over 100 munitions.

As part of the strikes, and as part of the broad effort to prevent the Iranian regime from obtaining a nuclear weapon, the nuclear reactor in the area of Arak in Iran was targeted, including the structure of the reactor's core seal, which is a key component in plutonium production.

Construction of the reactor began in 1997 but was not completed due to international community intervention.

The reactor was originally intended for the production of weapons-grade plutonium, capable of enabling the development of nuclear weapons. In light of various agreements, in recent years the Iranian regime advanced its conversion to produce low-grade plutonium, which is not suitable for the production of nuclear weapons. However, the regime deliberately ordered not to complete the conversion that would have prevented its use for nuclear weapons — in order to exert pressure on the West.

The strike targeted the component intended for plutonium production, in order to prevent the reactor from being restored and used for nuclear weapons development.

Additionally, the IAF struck a nuclear weapons development site in the area of Natanz. The site contained components and specialized equipment used to advance nuclear weapons development, and projects designed to accelerate the regime’s nuclear program were hosted there. 

Furthermore, the IAF also struck military production sites belonging to the Iranian regime, including factories producing raw materials, components used in assembling ballistic missiles, and sites for the production of Iranian air defense systems and missiles.

Additionally, air defense batteries, surface-to-surface missile storage sites, detection radar systems, and detection equipment belonging to the Iranian regime, were neutralized from the air.

Advertisement

Iran still has limited capacity to extract some cost for Israel's strikes in Iran--a ballistic missile struck a heavily populated region of Tel Aviv and hit an evacuated hospital, but that capacity is diminishing rapidly. 

But the military capacity between the two nations is so asymmetrical that it is hard to comprehend. A nation of fewer than 10 million people can strike and cripple the military capacity of another that has 92 million, fly with impunity over its skies, destroy infrastructure at will, and decapitate its military. 

It's stunning. 

Advertisement

Still, short of US intervention from the air, Iran will maintain at least some of its nuclear capacity, should the regime not fall. Successful regime change wars without boots on the ground have proven to be a tough nut to crack. 

I would bet that it is more likely than not that Trump strikes Iran's underground nuclear facilities, but he is being very coy about that. 

All the elements are in place for a strike, and Trump has made his demands clear: unconditional surrender, which means complete destruction of all Iran's nuclear capacity. He does not demand regime change, though. 

Israel and the United States can strike with impunity. Israel already is, and even has limited capacity to strike on the ground in surgical operations. 

It's up to Trump to decide whether the benefits of striking outweigh the costs.