The vice-presidential debate on October 3, 2024, highlighted urgent concerns regarding Iran's nuclear capabilities, particularly following a recent missile attack on Israel. Candidates Tim Walz and JD Vance were questioned about their stance on a potential preventive strike by Israel against Iran, with claims that Iran has significantly reduced the time needed to develop a nuclear weapon to 'one or two weeks.'
However, nuclear experts have countered that Iran would likely require months, if not up to a year, to actually produce a usable nuclear weapon. Houston G. Wood, a professor emeritus at the University of Virginia, stated that there is no immediate threat of Iran starting to exploit nuclear weapons this year. He estimated that once Iran acquires sufficient nuclear fuel, it would still take time to design and manufacture a bomb.
The debate's framing of Iran's nuclear timeline was criticized as misleading, as it conflated the time required to produce enriched uranium with the complex process of weaponization. Experts emphasized that advanced metallurgy and engineering are necessary to create a functional nuclear warhead.
This discussion comes in the wake of Iran launching 180 missiles at Israel, escalating tensions between the two nations. While Israel has vowed retaliation, President Joe Biden has expressed opposition to attacking Iran's nuclear infrastructure.
Recent public reports have created confusion regarding Iran's nuclear capabilities, often focusing on the timeline for acquiring nuclear fuel without detailing the additional steps required to build a nuclear weapon. A report from the Institute for Science and International Security indicated that Iran could potentially 'explode quickly' in terms of nuclear advancement, but experts warn that significant challenges remain before it could develop a functional nuclear arsenal.
Ultimately, the debate underscored the complexity of assessing Iran's nuclear threat and the geopolitical implications it holds for Israel and the broader international community.