Outside the Box

Iran’s Nuclear Program and its Nuclear Option

John Mauldin

November 10, 2011

Take a minute – and maybe a deep breath too – and imagine the markets at opening bell on a hypothetical morning when live video shows burning oil tankers in the Strait of Hormuz (through which 40% of the world's seaborne oil passes). Couple that with the already shaky state of the current global economy and you get ... well, what does chaos in a mosh pit look like?

Iran is back in the headlines, and once again behaving in a less-than-cooperative fashion regarding its nuclear enrichment program. After they've failed to deliver on promise after promise, it does not appear that Iran will come clean anytime soon, and definitely not in time for the IAEA (International Atomic Energy Agency) inspection report due out any day now.

So what are our options? This week I came across a report from my friends over at STRATFOR, a geopolitical intelligence company, that fully analyzes the situation. They were nice enough to let me share the full article with Outside the Box readers, so I don't want to give too much away here. All I'll say is that there are three factors deterring any form of action against Tehran, and one of them relates to the scenario I described above.

And if you'd like more than just the occasional report from STRATFOR via yours truly, I've finagled a nice discount on a STRATFOR subscription for my readers, plus a free copy of their book on Iran. >>Click here to find out more.<<

Your still grieving Rangers fan,

John Mauldin, Editor
Outside the Box

Like Outside the Box?

Then you'll love John's premium publication, Over My Shoulder. Each week, after sorting through vast amounts of economic, political, and investing news, John sends Over My Shoulder subscribers his pick of the week's most important commentary and data.

It's your opportunity to get the news John thinks matters most to your finances.

Learn More About Over My Shoulder

Iran's Nuclear Program and its Nuclear Option

STRATFOR


November 8, 2011

Details and specifics of the forthcoming International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) report on the Iranian nuclear program continued to leak out over the weekend, with the formal report expected later this week. The growing rhetoric about Iran — including talk from certain Israeli and American corners about an air campaign against Iran — had already begun to intensify in anticipation of the report,…

Discuss This

6 comments

We welcome your comments. Please comply with our Community Rules.

Comments

Walter Bruno

Nov. 14, 2011, 1:25 p.m.

To stabilize the Middle East region either both sides- Israel and Iran- have access to nuclear weapons or preferably, none of them.
Israel possessing a huge and increasingly growing arsenal, albeit not officially admitted, should take the lead (Americans) to negotiate with Iran with the objective of abolishing nuclear arsenals in the area, altogether. Israel`s legitimate security concerns could be safeguarded by American nucs like Germany is. A safe bet for Israel, given her strong support and influence in USA.
Naiv? Has it ever been tried? The stakes are too high not to try all peaceful venues.

carol pearce

Nov. 12, 2011, 4:25 a.m.

When British exploitation of Iranian oil resources was suspended by nationalization and an elected Parliament closing the British Embassy, we stepped into the soggy colonial shoes of a dying power, toppled an elected government, shored up the son of the Shah the British deposed and proceeded to divide up the oil spoils. We were in the driver’s seat for 26 years, getting cheap oil and supplying the shah with whatever weaponry he wanted, often to the dismay of our CIA.
When the only civil space left for opposition - the clergy - managed another coup, our feelings must have been very hurt.  Because we spent no end of money and good will supporting Saddam Hussein, encouraging him in his war against Iran and helping him in that miserable 8-year Persian Gulf War that was as much a stalemate as the Korean War.
Now we have embargoed, sanctioned and surrounded that country and we’re still not satisfied.  They opened their borders to us after 9/11 as we were invading Afghanistan and they found themselves called an axis of evil, soon to be surrounded by American troops in Afghanistan, Iraq and a proposed Bush build-up of new NATO defense (defense ?) program. Whoever was it to defend? To defend Europe from Russia? Iran?  Then of course there is Israel with no one knows how many nuclear warheads, a country that has invaded Lebanon twice, bombed Iraq and Syrian targets.
I have long failed to understand what exactly a sane country thousands of miles away has to fear from a country that has caused us nothing like the harm we have wrecked upon them.  All I can think of is our boundless fear of the Soviet Union after World War 2 - a country that had been absolutely devastated by the Nazi invasion, between 20 and 30 million dead, it’s industrial base moved to the east of the Urals and in no condition to invade anybody.
Who are we to decide to bomb a waterway thousands of miles away that we have no territorial claims on and no legal right to destroy unless we ourselves are under threat of attack?  We have gone from war to war since the day I was born, leaving misery and broken countries in our wake.  What insane insecurity drives us to do this, since we have in no way succeeded in making the world a more secure place.
As Truman said, trouble with us Americans is we’re always sticking our nose into someone else’s business!

S.D. Maley

Nov. 11, 2011, 9:57 p.m.

WSJ online item today”  “U.S. Plans Bomb Sales in Guld to Counter Iran”, which speaks of selling bunker-buster bombs to the UAE.

John Mack

Nov. 11, 2011, 1:23 p.m.

Excellent analysis. As you point out Iran already is quite successful in waging stealth war against what it sees as its enemies. The nuclear option would not make much of a difference. The Ayatollahs do not want nuclear war, despite rhetoric from subordinate politicians.

Nuclear war, among other consequences, would disrupt the organized crime rings and corrupt control of industry operated by the Revolutionary Guards. The Revolutionary Guards want to cause trouble for Iran’s adversaries, but not in a way that would disrupt their shared rule with the clerics.

Get used to it. Iran will develop nuclear technology (with the help of the ultra-right wing Koch brothers). From there it will probably make some nuclear weapons. Since this is inevitable we need to open diplomatic channels and keep them active.

Jack Hiller

Nov. 11, 2011, 12:14 p.m.

Ordinarily, STRATFOR’S style of coldly reasoned analysis, based on factual information, and a presumtion that nations are led by leaderships who are likewise rational in estimating cost-benefits for their actions, works well. Here it presents a failure of reasoned analysis, precisely by removing human emotion as a source of action. The Israeli nation is populated by survirors of the Holicost and emigrees from persecution worldwide. The difficulty of oil transport thru the Stait of Hormuz is not their top priority, despite its importance to Western economics. Expect Israel to act when it sees the time as right. Furthermore, its is naive to expect that action would be limited to a US style fighter bomber attack.

John Brandt 32018

Nov. 11, 2011, 10:17 a.m.

A secretive coupled attack of nuke sites and Iranian defenses along the straight of Hormuz is just around the corner by both US and Israeli forces and perhaps Great Britain and/or France participating.
I suspect this attack to come in early 2012.
John Brandt

© 2013 Mauldin Economics. All Rights Reserved.

Outside the Box is a free weekly economic e-letter by best-selling author and renowned financial expert, John Mauldin. You can learn more and get your free subscription by visiting www.MauldinEconomics.com.

Please write to subscribers@mauldineconomics.com to inform us of any reproductions, including when and where copy will be reproduced. You must keep the letter intact, from introduction to disclaimers. If you would like to quote brief portions only, please reference www.MauldinEconomics.com.

To subscribe to John Mauldin's e-letter, please click here: http://www.mauldineconomics.com/subscribe

To change your email address, please click here: http://www.mauldineconomics.com/change-address

Outside the Box and MauldinEconomics.com is not an offering for any investment. It represents only the opinions of John Mauldin and those that he interviews. Any views expressed are provided for information purposes only and should not be construed in any way as an offer, an endorsement, or inducement to invest and is not in any way a testimony of, or associated with, Mauldin's other firms. John Mauldin is the Chairman of Mauldin Economics, LLC. He also is the President of Millennium Wave Advisors, LLC (MWA) which is an investment advisory firm registered with multiple states, President and registered representative of Millennium Wave Securities, LLC, (MWS) member FINRA, SIPC, through which securities may be offered . MWS is also a Commodity Pool Operator (CPO) and a Commodity Trading Advisor (CTA) registered with the CFTC, as well as an Introducing Broker (IB) and NFA Member. Millennium Wave Investments is a dba of MWA LLC and MWS LLC. This message may contain information that is confidential or privileged and is intended only for the individual or entity named above and does not constitute an offer for or advice about any alternative investment product. Such advice can only be made when accompanied by a prospectus or similar offering document. Past performance is not indicative of future performance. Please make sure to review important disclosures at the end of each article. Mauldin companies may have a marketing relationship with products and services mentioned in this letter for a fee.

Note: Joining The Mauldin Circle is not an offering for any investment. It represents only the opinions of John Mauldin and Millennium Wave Investments. It is intended solely for investors who have registered with Millennium Wave Investments and its partners at www.MauldinCircle.com (formerly AccreditedInvestor.ws) or directly related websites. The Mauldin Circle may send out material that is provided on a confidential basis, and subscribers to the Mauldin Circle are not to send this letter to anyone other than their professional investment counselors. Investors should discuss any investment with their personal investment counsel. You are advised to discuss with your financial advisers your investment options and whether any investment is suitable for your specific needs prior to making any investments. John Mauldin is the President of Millennium Wave Advisors, LLC (MWA), which is an investment advisory firm registered with multiple states. John Mauldin is a registered representative of Millennium Wave Securities, LLC, (MWS), an FINRA registered broker-dealer. MWS is also a Commodity Pool Operator (CPO) and a Commodity Trading Advisor (CTA) registered with the CFTC, as well as an Introducing Broker (IB). Millennium Wave Investments is a dba of MWA LLC and MWS LLC. Millennium Wave Investments cooperates in the consulting on and marketing of private and non-private investment offerings with other independent firms such as Altegris Investments; Capital Management Group; Absolute Return Partners, LLP; Fynn Capital; Nicola Wealth Management; and Plexus Asset Management. Investment offerings recommended by Mauldin may pay a portion of their fees to these independent firms, who will share 1/3 of those fees with MWS and thus with Mauldin. Any views expressed herein are provided for information purposes only and should not be construed in any way as an offer, an endorsement, or inducement to invest with any CTA, fund, or program mentioned here or elsewhere. Before seeking any advisor's services or making an investment in a fund, investors must read and examine thoroughly the respective disclosure document or offering memorandum. Since these firms and Mauldin receive fees from the funds they recommend/market, they only recommend/market products with which they have been able to negotiate fee arrangements.

PAST RESULTS ARE NOT INDICATIVE OF FUTURE RESULTS. THERE IS RISK OF LOSS AS WELL AS THE OPPORTUNITY FOR GAIN WHEN INVESTING IN MANAGED FUNDS. WHEN CONSIDERING ALTERNATIVE INVESTMENTS, INCLUDING HEDGE FUNDS, YOU SHOULD CONSIDER VARIOUS RISKS INCLUDING THE FACT THAT SOME PRODUCTS: OFTEN ENGAGE IN LEVERAGING AND OTHER SPECULATIVE INVESTMENT PRACTICES THAT MAY INCREASE THE RISK OF INVESTMENT LOSS, CAN BE ILLIQUID, ARE NOT REQUIRED TO PROVIDE PERIODIC PRICING OR VALUATION INFORMATION TO INVESTORS, MAY INVOLVE COMPLEX TAX STRUCTURES AND DELAYS IN DISTRIBUTING IMPORTANT TAX INFORMATION, ARE NOT SUBJECT TO THE SAME REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS AS MUTUAL FUNDS, OFTEN CHARGE HIGH FEES, AND IN MANY CASES THE UNDERLYING INVESTMENTS ARE NOT TRANSPARENT AND ARE KNOWN ONLY TO THE INVESTMENT MANAGER. Alternative investment performance can be volatile. An investor could lose all or a substantial amount of his or her investment. Often, alternative investment fund and account managers have total trading authority over their funds or accounts; the use of a single advisor applying generally similar trading programs could mean lack of diversification and, consequently, higher risk. There is often no secondary market for an investor’s interest in alternative investments, and none is expected to develop.

All material presented herein is believed to be reliable but we cannot attest to its accuracy. Opinions expressed in these reports may change without prior notice. John Mauldin and/or the staffs may or may not have investments in any funds cited above as well as economic interest. John Mauldin can be reached at 800-829-7273.