'Iran hit wouldn't halt nuke program'

Oxford Research Group says Israel shouldn't use military action.

Nuclear Power plant 311 AP (photo credit: AP [illustrative])
Nuclear Power plant 311 AP
(photo credit: AP [illustrative])
An Israeli attack on Iranian nuclear facilities would not necessarily prevent Iran from eventually acquiring nuclear weapons, according to a British think-tank, Reuters reported Thursday.
Oxford Research Group said military action should not be used as a response to Iran's possible nuclear weapons ambitions.
RELATED:'Nuclear Iran less threat than chance of binational state'Our World: A war on whose terms?Int'l community more willing to pressure Iran
"An Israeli attack on Iran would be the start of a protracted conflict that would be unlikely to prevent the eventual acquisition of nuclear weapons by Iran and might even encourage it," it said in a report, as cited by Reuters.
A strike could also lead to greater instability in the region resulting in unpredictable security consequences, the research group added.
The report, by Paul Rogers, professor of peace studies at the University of Bradford, claimed that a US strike on Iran appeared unlikely but Israel's capabilities of military action had increased.
The differing approaches to how best to deal with the Iranian threat were seen when Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu and US President Barak Obama met earlier in July.
Differences were highlighted between the Obama administration and Israel when it comes to the perception of the threat posed by a nuclear-armed Iran, as well as their estimation of the consequences of preventative military action.
Analysts have said that there are problems stemming from the White House’s belief that Iran would be willing to strike a “grand bargain” if an American president emerged who threw cold water on the US-Israeli relationship.