Preventive military action against Iran

If Iran persists on the path of nuclear weapons development


Share/Save/Bookmark

Preventive military action against Iran
by Patrick Clawson & Michael Eisenstadt
01-Jul-2008
 

On June 20, 2008, Michael Eisenstadt and Patrick Clawson addressed a Policy Forum at The Washington Institute. Mr. Eisenstadt is a senior fellow and director of the Institute's Military and Security Studies Program, and Dr. Clawson is deputy director of research at the Institute. The two recently coauthored The Last Resort: Consequences of Preventive Military Action against Iran. The following is a rapporteur's summary of their remarks.


Online audio of this event is also available at WashingtonInstitute.org

PATRICK CLAWSON
When considering preventive military action against Iran's nuclear program, one must remember that such an exercise is purely hypothetical at this point. In fact, with some renewed vigor, diplomacy still might succeed in convincing Iran to suspend its nuclear program, as was the case in 2003.

Context matters when discussing preventive action against Iran. For example, if Iran's leaders announced they were developing nuclear weapons, leaving the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), and intending to test a nuclear weapon, the debate for using preventive military force would be entirely different. There is still a debate in the analytical community whether Iran wants a nuclear weapon or just a rapid breakout capability. Iran's Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei has stated that Iran has no intention of acquiring nuclear weapons and that their use is un-Islamic.

If Iran suddenly announced its intent to test a nuclear weapon -- voiding the statements of the past twenty-five years -- such a situation would cast grave doubts on previous assessments and force analysts to seriously reconsider how well they can predict future Iranian action. If Iran persists on the path of nuclear weapons development, the resulting international crisis would surely change the discourse over preventive military action. The use of preventive military force, in this and other cases, would become thinkable.

Several other factors make a difference in the context of the use of force. In domestic Iranian politics, the extent to which the country is led by hardliners, who are seen by their own people as risk-takers, overly assertive, and overly confident, creates one context. In contrast, if Iran were to elect a new president who is seen as a man of moderation and compromise, such as situation would create a very different context in Iran, internationally, and in the United States. Similarly, developments on the international diplomatic front would affect the context.

An additional key issue is on what basis a determination is made about the status of Iran's nuclear program. The U.S. intelligence community has a decidedly mixed record on this score. The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), on the other hand, has done some remarkable detective work during its on-site inspections in North Korea, Iraq, and Iran. Therefore, a decision to use preventive military force based on IAEA inspections would be very different than acting on disputed intelligence.

The level of support for military action will determine what happens after the operation, and is also an important metric in determining the success of such a strike. Success would also weigh on domestic U.S. and international support for, and Iranian domestic rejection or acceptance of, military action. Iran, based on its record, is sensitive to world opinion, and this should not be discounted when considering diplomatic pressure in resolving the issue. The impact of a strike on global U.S. standing will also be a key determinant in the success or failure of military action. A strike on an Iranian nuclear facility would have the added objective of dissuading others international actors from pursuing nuclear arms.

MICHAEL EISENSTADT
Assessing the risks and outcomes of preventive military action against Iran is a difficult analytical challenge to undertake because of the military and political uncertainties, and the high stakes involved. Diplomacy is by far the best option right now, at least as long as it offers even a mild chance of success.

Nevertheless, the United States might come to the conclusion soon that diplomacy has run its course and that other options, namely prevention and deterrence, have to be examined. Prevention must remain as an option in order to bolster diplomacy, and because it may be necessary at some point. The public debate about prevention tends to focus on military and technical challenges. On the issue of targeting, accurate intelligence is the sine qua non for effective prevention. There are also the challenges of weaponeering and hitting hardened, buried facilities effectively. Success most likely would require multiple strikes over time.

To measure the success of such a policy, the most crucial factor is whether Iran decides to rebuild. Success would likely hinge on Washington's ability to craft a sustainable policy that effectively integrates military, diplomatic, and informational policy instruments to cause maximum destruction to the nuclear infrastructure, to mitigate the consequences of Iranian retaliation, and to set the conditions for successful post-strike diplomacy or military action. Iran's possible responses, though not exhaustive, include: withholding its oil exports, disrupting regional oil exports, attacking allied and U.S. regional assets and interests, or launching a full-scale war.

Prevention cannot be examined in a vacuum, however, and must be considered alongside the other policy option available to the United States, namely deterrence. The cost-benefit analysis of the two options may be one of the most complex and difficult problems facing the United States, given the uncertainties of success and the prices of failure for each. Deterrence is not an easy, low-risk alternative. If one were to juxtapose the risks and benefits of the two options, the balance sheet might conclude that prevention entails significant near-term risk of Iranian retaliation for an uncertain outcome whose benefits may be relatively short-lived, while deterrence defers the crisis but runs very high risks in the long term. There is also the risk that Iran's acquisition of nuclear capability may tempt other countries in the Middle East and elsewhere to pursue their own nuclear capability.

Prevention and deterrence are not mutually exclusive options. Prevention may delay but not halt Iran's nuclear program, and may in the end be just a very costly detour on the path to deterrence. Given that the United States has set a very high rhetorical bar with Iran's nuclear program, if Tehran acquired a nuclear weapon, the United States might have more difficulty establishing credible future warnings, threats, and red lines.

If diplomacy fails, either option will have profound consequences for the future of the Middle East, the international nuclear nonproliferation regime, and for U.S. standing in the world. For this reason, the United States must redouble its efforts to find a diplomatic solution to this problem.

This rapporteur's summary was prepared by Audrey Flake.

View this PolicyWatch and enjoy streaming audio of this event on our website at here

Share/Save/Bookmark

 
default

Chand Kalami az Madar-e Aroos!!

by Anonymous500 (not verified) on

:-)) cool it down Haj Agha, cool it down, you may get a heart attack. As Gooruhban Ghanndali used to say: "harchi shooma begin Sarkar Ostovar" (Whatever you say Sarg). What ever you say, Yek Irani Diger!!

However, from all these "charandiyat" that you have written above, I got this distinct genicidal message of yours where you thank these mullahs for having kicked the PMOI out of Iran which of course eventauted by IRI's massacring tens of thousands of the PMOI patriots. You are not "Yek Irani Digar," but "Yek Hezbollahi Digar".

Thats all folks.


default

PMOI: Murderers for Hire

by Yek Irani Digar (not verified) on

The record of PMOI indicates that they are not a patriotic group. Patriots do not kill women, children, old, and young of their own kind. PMOI are a bunch of psychopaths who sell themselves to the higher bitter. These psychos wanted total control of the Iranian or at least share the government with IRI. When they could not get it, they killed thousands of Iranian youth (both pro and against IRI) to calm their psychotic urge. Had they taken control of Iran, PMOI would have been like Khmer Rouge. The memoirs of the people who have left this cult indicate that PMOI’s psycho leader (Rajavi) is no different than Cambodia’s Pol Pot. We should all thank IRI for kicking PMOI criminal out of Iran.
.
Just take a look what PMOI Cult has done after they were driven out of Iran. They joined hand with one of the most ruthless criminal on Earth (Saddam Hussein). They even attacked Iran by their tanks, again causing the death of thousands of innocent Iranians. As the present, PMOI are nothing but a bunch of murderers (or whores) for hire.


default

PMIO have no support inside Iran

by Ali reza (not verified) on

When PMIO sided with Saddam in its war against Iran,it lost its credibility among Iranians,and people would not forget that.The saying that goes like your enemy's enemy is my friend does not work in their case.


default

Prove your case: How unpopular the PMOI is?

by Anonymous500 (not verified) on

To JustoneIranian:

:--)) You seem to have a sense of humor which is a sign of intelligence.

In fact the PMOI not only established its headquarters in Iraq during Saddam Hussesin's regime in Iraq, it also created the National Liberation Army of Iran (NLAI), that rattled the cage of these mullahs through one hundred operations during 1986-1998. one of the most spectacular of these was the Forugh Javidan in 1989. Every year the IRI celleberates the fact that the Forugh Operations did not achieve its goal, the overthrow of Khomeini and his IRI.

In the Forugh Operations, close to 30,000 Mojaheds and non-Mojahed honorable and brave Iranian patriots tackeld the SPEAH, the VEVAK operatives and the Baij forces and decimated more than 50,000 of them. The PMOI lost a combined number of 1891 Mojahed and non Mojahed Iranian patriots. You better believe it buddy.

Velayati, the then Foreign Minister, in his memoires says that at the time of the Fourgh Javidan (called Mersad in IRI literature), he was in New York discussing the cease-fire terms with Iraq that, he was informed of the Mojahedin operations. This cease-fire was taking place at a time that Khomeini had been informed by his advisors that the NLAI had reached a status that could invade Western part of Iran, liberate Kermanshah and establish a Provisional Gov there and then march to Tehran to overthrow the IRI.

This was also at a time that the country's war torn economy was at the verge of collapse after 6 years of futile and costly war in which Khomeini's slogan was "Today Karbala, Tomorrow Jerusalem." Not to mention the insurmountable amount of damges that Khomeini had inflicted on Iran, our national interests, and our people.

Velayati in his memoires states that the news was so shocking to him that he asked for a ciggaret despite the fact that he was a non-smoker. He also says that he smoked the whole cigarret including its filter to dampen his shock. Velayati is also on record that it was the worst days of his life. I believe that Velayati is genuine in his sentiments in his memoires when it comes to his firght of the fait of this regime at the hands of the NLAI.

That is why the present regime's biggest nightmare is the possibility that now that the PMOI has been deproscribed, it will resume its overthrow operations inside of Iran: PMOI is the Engine of Democratic Cahnge from Within and that is why IRI supporters demonize the PMOI on a daily basis.

As to the unpopularity of the PMOI, I have no way of gauging how unpopular this organization is, but lets assume, for the sake of argument, that they are not popular. Does it change the fact that the IRI is an international outcase that is universally despised by our people? Do you support this regime, JustoneIranian?

Let us say that you hate the PMOI, is there any alternative that you or other haters of the PMOI have? Let us say that the PMOI were to disappear from the face of the earth this moment as you guys and galls wish, do you think that these rabid mullahs and their SPEAH-e JAHL would become friends of Iranian people?

And, most importantly, who says that the PMOI does not have any popular support in Iran? You know some thing that we don't? If you have first hand knowledge about this important issue, why not share with the rest of us?

But please, putting some bogous pictures from VEVAK-based sites dime a dozen run by a number of ex-Mojahed now turned into know it all because 20 years ago they had some affiliation with the PMOI, is no longer cute. You know why? Because Saddam is gone, his regime is gone, the War in Iraq is almost over, President Bush's term is about to expire, and the PMOI in Iraq has been investigated by about 6 US agencies that have arrest and prosecution powers-- and none has reached any conclusion that the PMOI has committed any crime, has been involved in any illegal fund raising activities, or that has been part of the Saddam regime. Now if you don't believe this, go to these American agancies and give your evidence to the contrary.

Do you have such evidence, JustoneIranian? yes or no?

Finally, if what you say is true, there is no way that PMOI will be able to hide that truth behind "propaganda," the darling of of those who believe that all one needs is "propaganda"!!


default

PMOI supporter, you are correct

by JustanIranian (not verified) on

In fact, the Mojahedin-e Khalq did NOT establish their headquarters in Saddam's Iraq during the 1980s. And they are NOT currently based at Camp Ashraf either. Those are lies propagated by VEVAK. And they never collaborated with Saddam's regime either. That is another lie created by "wiki-Micky-Mouse.com pictures". The Rajavis enjoy an enormous amount of popularity among Iranians for their collaboration with Saddam during his war with Iran. Iranians are eagerly awaiting "President" Maryam Rajavi's arrival in Iran :-)


default

Mr. Clawson et al: Instead

by sueiran (not verified) on

Mr. Clawson et al: Instead of bombing Iran, Israel and the US should take their case to some kind of international court wherein the court decides whether the Islamic Republic's foreign policies constitute
1)long-term an existential threat against Israel which is surrounded by Islamic revolutionaries in the region

2)destalbize world peace via exporting their version of militant Islam across the globe

3)pitting the Islamic vs non-Islamic nations/world against one another; in other words, inciting Religious war against Infidels

4)render international community's trust, given their trackrecord(using terror to gain economic and ideological leverage; hiding their nuclear program for 18 years, etc.),

5)anti-semetic and genocidal goals of vaporizing the jews per Rafsanjani's comment and khomeini's quest to return Qudos to muslims, etc....
and so on.


default

PMOI has support of freedom lovers indeed

by Anonymous500 (not verified) on

To JustanIranian:

You ask what kind of people will have their headquarters in Iraq: here is your answr buddy:

The kind of people who would like to kick the sorry ass of the God Father of International Terrorism to the curb, the IRI which is composed of a bunch of common criminal and thieves that comrises the regime of the Velayat.

These Velayati mullahs and their SEPAH-e JAHL will not leave Iran by good words and persuasion, but by the sheer force of our People who, through the good offices of the PMOI, will deliver one final big "toosari, pas-gardani, and tippa" to this regime and to its low life scum supporters in Iran and in daiaspora as WE send this composite to the dust bin of history.

:-)) Any more questions about the PMOI? As to your wiki-Micky-Mouse.com pictures, put it on your pipe and smoke it buddy; in this day and age of computer generated phony picutres, no body gives a damn to these type of evidence and pictures any more. The PMOI has proven its innocence beyond a reasonable doubt in British High Court. I tend to give credence to the British High court than to these comical Internat pictures, dime a dozen.

Interestingly, these types of "evidence" that the likes of Jack Straw had based their case on to proscribe the PMOI as a terrorist organization proven to be a disgrace to the British Government as communicated by a number of the Britsh Lords who have seen these type of bogous "documents" that are mass produce by the VEVAK and sent to its agents around the world to demonize the PMOI.

In any case the PMOI is on record that it will welcome any impartial legal investigation of its methods of fund raising in any democratic court system; do you think that these DOZD, and JAANI, and KAHEN, and NEKBAT akhunds in Iran will follow suit JustanIranian? Think about it, do you have any answer for that?


default

PMOI has support of all freedom-lovers (for example, Saddam)

by JustanIranian (not verified) on

The question is this: is there any foreign enemy of Iran (whether Baathist Iraq, the U.S. or Israel) with whom the Mojahedin-e Khalq will NOT collaborate?

Check out this photo:

//upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thum...

What kind of people would establish their headquarters in Iraq at a time when Saddam is dropping bombs on Iran's cities?


default

Instead of preventive military action recognize Iran' Resistance

by Anonymous500 (not verified) on

Mr. Sadegh, the PMOI is a world class savvy political organization that fights against of the most ruthless Neo-Nazi-type of Mafia that we call it, unfortunately, the Islamic Republic of Iran (it has nothing to do with Islam, nor with Iran's glorious culture, nor with republicanism); PMOI does not need this or that think tank operatives support, but if support comes from legitimate sources for overthrwoing this regime in Iran, the PMOI very likely would not pooh-pooh such support. Your emam Khomeini in Iran recieved much clandestine support from the Garnad Lodges of you know what, next to our people; the PMOI has the support of our people, but also seeks the suppport of people around the world

What the PMPO has achieved in garnering popular support in Iran and in diaspora is now awakening even the likes of the New York Times, the mouthpiece of America's mostly uniformed and delusional Left as reflected in the following article that I have copied and put for your enjoyment:

نیویورك تایمز باعنوان « اپوزیسیون ایران: نامگذاری تروریستی آمریكا، نا عادلانه است»، نوشت: هواداران اپوزیسیون ایران روز شنبه در جریان یك گردهمایی بزرگ در خارج از پاریس، از اتحادیه اروپا و ایالات متحده خواستند تا نام این سازمان را از لیست سیاه سازمان های تروریستی خارج كنند.این گردهمایی تنها چند روز بعد از آنكه انگلستان این گروه را از لیست سازمان های ممنوعه خود خارج ساخت، برگزار گردید.
مریم رجوی- رییس جمهور منتخب شورای ملی مقاومت گفت كه وضعیت این سازمان در آمریكا و اتحادیه اروپا مانع آن جهت ایجاد تغییر رژیم در ایران می شود. مریم رجوی در سخنرانی خود در گردهمایی پاریس، برچسب تروریستی را نا عادلانه خواند.
رجوی كه برای جمعیت پرشور و هیجان زده سخنرانی می كرد گفت،: جهان را از موثرترین وسیله برای مبارزه با فاشیسم مذهبی و تروریسم، محروم نكنید. به جای آن در كنار افرادی بایستید كه می توانند آزادی را برای مردم ایران بیاورند.
نیویورك تایمز ادامه داد: شورای ملی مقاومت می گوید، بیش از 70هزار نفر در این اجتماع شركت داشتند، از جمله بسیاری از كشورهای همسایه اروپایی و تعدادی از آمریكا، كانادا و كشورهای خاورمیانه و شمال آفریقا در این گردهمایی حضور یافتند.
سازماندهندگان گفتند، 15نماینده بریتانیایی در اجتماع روز شنبه پاریس شركت كردند، از جمله وزیركشور سابق دیوید وادینگتون.
لرد وادینگتون در سخنرانی خود گفت تصمیم بریتانیا یك گام مهم بود و او برای جشن گرفتن این پیروزی، به پاریس رفته بود.

As to the CountrPUnch's "Shelakhteh-Chapool-Mozghol" type of gabildigook critique, its rendition of the world event is as valid as that of Dr. Abbasi of "Emam Shemr" University in Iran that produces such Hezbollahi Lat-O-Lompan thinkers on a monthly basis.


farokh2000

What to do with...........?

by farokh2000 on

I have no idea why so many people have been brain washed to think that U.S. and its "Allies" must do something about some other Countries' actions. Who died amd made U.S. the Police of the World?

Isn't United States the only Country on Earth that has ever used Nuclear Bombs to murder millions and still use Cluster Bombs, which are a sort of Nuclear to kill more people in Iraq and Afghanistan?

Isn't Israel the owner of one of the biggest stock piles of Nuclear Weapons and Bombs and like US is killing people and occupying their land?

So, how come no one is worried about these governments and they are all talking about WMDs that Iraq did not have and the ones that Iran does not have?

Isn't there something wrong with this picture people?

I am not a supporter of the Mullahs, far from it, but people of Iran are the ones who should be ousting them if they don't want them there, not outside invaders who have nothing in mind but profit for their Multinationals and cronies.

They manufactured all kind of lies to invade and occupy Iraq and Afghanistan and now they are at it with Iran?

My guess is this time they would be taking a bigger bite than they can chew.

 


default

Only Goy-haters and Shabbas Goyim speak of "Jew-phobia"

by AnonymousMan (not verified) on

The obsessive focus on imaginary instances of "anti-semitism" and his latest clunky neologism, "Jew-phobia", are hallmarks of two forms of deranged mindsets:

1) Extremist "Goy-haters", i.e. those who consider themselves God's Chosen People and the other 99.8% of the world's population to be "Filthy Goyim"

2) Non-Chosen People who abjectly worship extremist Goy-haters and who, therefore, adopt the distorted worldview of aforementioned group

Cognitive-bahvaioral treatment may or may not prove therapeutic.


Fred

Jew-phobia

by Fred on

Islamist/Anti-Semites and their like minded lefty allies through their leg work for the Islamist republic are accomplices to crimes of the Islamist republic. Their Jew-phobia has gotten them to act irrationally to a degree the future historians will no doubt be hard pressed to fully comprehend. On the one hand they toe the Islamist line of subjugating Iranian national interests to a disastrous Palestine centric foreign policy. On the other they are compelled to defend the very foes of the Iranian national interests that they claim to be defending. The most obvious example of this wacked-out behavior is that the Arab neighbors of Iran, without an exception; with an eye out for territorial gains do not recognize the historic name of the Persian Gulf, instead using “Arabian Gulf”. Or along with their Iranian lefty consorts constantly float the Nations of Iran nonsense in the form of “Azaris, Kurds, Baluchis, etc...” This includes the Islamist republic’s paid for client state of Syria.  Needless to say during the eight years of Iraq’s war against Iran the Palestinians took side with and cheered on the Arab aggressor as did other Arab states. The only neighborhood state that came to help Iran materially and strategically was Israel. If Israel at the height of the eight year war had not eliminated Saddam’s A bomb factory at Osirak, it is safe to assume Iran would have been the recipient of the first nuclear explosion in the Middle East. The current continued demonization of Israel as the state intent on mincing Iran to little pieces fly in the face of historical facts and strategic realities unless one is afflicted by Jew-phobia, then it all makes perfect sense. 


default

It aint gonna happen

by Alborzi (not verified) on

Iran is 2 x as big and 3 x more populace. Iran has not been under sanctions and wars for the past 20 years.
An attack on Iran would cause severe retaliation on other targets. This would be totally unacceptable to the economic system. There maybe some kidnapping and mayhem but the war is not in the cards. Now all the talk is to cause more votes for McCain. However as they say, Jange Pashe ba Habashe Mikhahad Besh Mikahad Nasheh. Obama is the same pokh.


default

Likudniks & right-wing fellow travelers leave much to be desired

by AnonymousIndividual (not verified) on

It's amusing to see that the most obsequiously pro-Tel Aviv elements in our midst consistently try to change the subject in order to obscure the threats posed to Iran's territorial integrity and sovereignty by the U.S. and Israeli governments.

The comedic, hollow, and promiscuous accusations of "anti-semitism", "Islamism", and "leftism" against anyone and everyone never fail to put a smile on my face. (Never mind that the quasi-"Islamic Marxist" Mojahedin-e Khalq are the most enthusiastic Iranian proponents of an attack against Iran).


sadegh

If you can't (or rather

by sadegh on

If you can't (or rather don't want to) answer that yourself, I certainly can't help you...Fred what a silly thing to say, are you just desperate to have a lovers' spat?...Nice to see we are in agreement on several points (AM I DREAMING OR HAVE I MAYBE INGESTED A CRATE OF MAGIC MUSHROOMS) at least, I'm grateful for that...

Ba Arezu-ye Movafaghiat, Sadegh

 


Fred

Talk the talk NOT walk the walk

by Fred on

These two guys,Michael Eisenstadt and Patrick Clawson,   probably fit your description of them. But what peaks my interest is your worry about their intention to bring about “Lebanonization of Iran” into “Azeri, Kurdish, Arab and Baluchi states”. If that is indicative of bad intentions and not an iota of doubt that it is and whoever contemplates it or uses such dissection of Iran into Azari, Kurd, Baluchi… as separate entities fits the bill, we are in complete agreement on that score. Then please explain the heading to this recently posted blog entry of yours. “Reel Bad Arabs (and Iranians, Indians, Azeris, Baluchis, Pakistanis, Muslims etc...),
“Azaris, Baluchis”?

Islamist?Anti-Semites and their like minded lefty allies leave a lot to be desired.


sadegh

Clawson and Eisenstadt are

by sadegh on

Clawson and Eisenstadt are dangerous neocon Likunites willing to initiate global disaster in order to bomb Iran, killing and maiming innocent men, women and children and causing untold damage to Iran's infrastructure, energy resources and territorial integrity. They also support the MEK and have been vocal in their support to take the cult organization off the State Department terror list. Clawson has defended the MEK on this very site. Please be wary of these pseudo-scholars.

All three have close ties to the Israeli government. WINEP has long promoted policies favored by Israel, and its founding director, Martin Indyk, was previously research director of the leading pro-Israel lobby, the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC). Freilich is a former Israeli deputy national security adviser.

These analysts, all of whom are pushing for a U.S., rather than an Israeli attack, argue that Iran's power to retaliate for a U.S. attack on its nuclear facilities is quite limited. Equally significant, they also emphasize that Iran is a rational actor that would have to count the high costs of retaliation. That conclusion stands in sharp contrast to the official Israeli line that Iran cannot be deterred because of its allegedly apocalyptic Islamic viewpoint on war with Israel.

//www.antiwar.com/porter/?articleid=13072

See the links below - the LA Times piece (the article by Gareth Porter for the Inter Press Service, reprinted on Antiwar.com is also excellent) below shows well these individuals complete indifference to the human cost that would be borne by Iranian civilians and perhaps the territorial integrity of Iran as we know it. The idea that Iran might break up into Azeri, Kurdish, Arab and Baluchi states in a kind of Lebanonization of Iran is actively being contemplated by the American Enterprise Institute with which both men have strong ties. Colonization of all of Iran's natural resources is of course a given.

//latimesblogs.latimes.com/babylonbeyond/2008/06/iran-neocons-sa.html

//www.campaigniran.org/casmii/index.php?q=node/5019

//www.antiwar.com/porter/?articleid=13072

//jboc.blogspot.com/2004/10/likudnik-patrick-clawson-puffs-up.html

//www.counterpunch.org/goff11102004.html

//sos-at.blogspot.com/2008/06/neocon-scholars-target-irans-oil.html

Ba Arezu-ye Movafaghiat, Sadegh