What's to be done about Iran?

[Feck]

I think we should demonise them, place ever increasing sanctions on them deny all knowledge of the fact we have been fucking them up ,by fair means or foul, for a generation or two . Then we can arm their neighbours with lots of better weapons than they have and cry like babies when they say they hate us . If that doesn't work then claiming their desire to own a few nukes is a threat to the whole world and invade .

[lsdetroit]

we should let them attack us first. there's to many people anyway.

[AnInconvenientScotsman]

The nuclear nations aren't living up to their part of the NPT so why should anyone else?

Examples?

If Iran develop nuclear weapons, then both Iran and Russia (at least) will have violated the second and first articles of the NPT respectively - considering that Russia knew back in 2007 and know now that there is a good chance of Iran misusing Russian fuel for research into developing - or directly developing - nuclear weapons, I'd suggest that be considered a failure on Russia's part to uphold the NPT.

[Twiglet]

The US is in violation of the following:

"Recalling that, in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations, States must refrain in
their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or
political independence of any State," - threatened both Iraq and Iran

Article 1:

"ARTICLE I
Each nuclear-weapon State Party to the Treaty undertakes not to transfer to any recipient
whatsoever nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive devices or control over such weapons or
explosive devices directly, or indirectly; and not in any way to assist, encourage, or induce any
non-nuclear-weapon State to manufacture or otherwise acquire nuclear weapons or other
nuclear explosive devices, or control over such weapons or explosive devices."

Almost certainly complicit in helping Israel to develop weapons.

Article III

Arguably in violation. Article III details the right of all nations to use nuclear power for peaceful purposes. Recent diplomatic sabotage of Turkey & Brazils negotiations with Iran suggest otherwise.



III.2 violated by supplying India and Pakistan...

etc etc

Anyway if we are worried by dangerous religious loonies in control of nukes, what about:

[Feck]

And little has been said that another nuclear power refused to sign the treaty and is never inspected for nukes .

It's hard to justify to the arab countries in the middle east that Israel can have nukes ,not sign the treaty and is still the recipient of lots of US military aid .

[Ian]

Some fair points about the NPT. So if signatory nations to the NPT have some histories of violating its provisions, what argument is that to shrugging or looking the other way while Iran gets the bomb?

There's a legitimate proliferation concern. All those missiles fired by Hezbollah in 2006 - where did they come from? Iran, and some via Syria. Sure, states sell arms to each other, and it's entirely possible that the US assisted Israel in its nuclear program back in the 70s, but Hezbollah is not a state. They could detonate a nuke or a dirty bomb in Tel Aviv with little fear of comparable reciprocation. And in such a scenario, Israel would have little option to retaliate against Iran instead.

Aside from proliferation concerns, there would be a disaster in regional stability. I don't think anyone would argue that Iran doesn't have some valid reasons for WANTING to become a nuclear power. Tehran no doubt sees itself surrounded by adversaries. And they are, no doubt, surrounded by adversaries! It comes down to politics. Sweden and Australia have the technology to implement their own programs, but nobody in their neighborhoods would really give a damn. Britain and France are neighbors with large arsenals, but nobody worries about them blowing each other to pieces. Even if Iran could be trusted to keep its materials and technology secure from non-state actors, that capability would be one helluva unstable element in the event of a regional crisis - something more than a bit likely in that part of the world. Comparisons to Israel are fine - their nuclear arsenal is probably the biggest reason why they haven't suffered a full-scale invasion in over 37 years. But it's still there, and may soon have a rival arsenal. I'd be okay with seeing Israel give up its nukes, but that's not going to happen. Since it's not, let's be realistic about what would only make things much worse, even if it's not "fair" to Iran.

Disclaimer: none of this is to say that I'm in favor of a military option to keep Iran from going nuclear. I'm really not.

[Gawd]

And little has been said that another nuclear power refused to sign the treaty and is never inspected for nukes .

It's hard to justify to the arab countries in the middle east that Israel can have nukes ,not sign the treaty and is still the recipient of lots of US military aid .

Bingo. America is being racist.

[Ian]

And little has been said that another nuclear power refused to sign the treaty and is never inspected for nukes .

It's hard to justify to the arab countries in the middle east that Israel can have nukes ,not sign the treaty and is still the recipient of lots of US military aid .

Bingo. America is being racist.

Yeah, just look at our President!

[Gawd]

And little has been said that another nuclear power refused to sign the treaty and is never inspected for nukes .

It's hard to justify to the arab countries in the middle east that Israel can have nukes ,not sign the treaty and is still the recipient of lots of US military aid .

Bingo. America is being racist.

Yeah, just look at our President!

So then give Iran the bomb.

BTW, for all the sucking up Obama's people have done to Israel, he's just looking like a token black man controlled by Joooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooos.

[Ian]

And little has been said that another nuclear power refused to sign the treaty and is never inspected for nukes .

It's hard to justify to the arab countries in the middle east that Israel can have nukes ,not sign the treaty and is still the recipient of lots of US military aid .

Bingo. America is being racist.

Yeah, just look at our President!

So then give Iran the bomb.

'Cause that would make everything just swell.

[Gawd]

And little has been said that another nuclear power refused to sign the treaty and is never inspected for nukes .

It's hard to justify to the arab countries in the middle east that Israel can have nukes ,not sign the treaty and is still the recipient of lots of US military aid .

Bingo. America is being racist.

Yeah, just look at our President!

So then give Iran the bomb.

'Cause that would make everything just swell.

Yes it would.

[Twiglet]

Some fair points about the NPT. So if signatory nations to the NPT have some histories of violating its provisions, what argument is that to shrugging or looking the other way while Iran gets the bomb?

The argument is that Iran doesn't feel compelled to take it's obligations under the NPT all that seriously because the US hasn't taken it's obligations under the NPT seriously either. Assuming that Iran is actively working towards developing a weapon. The thing about "looking the other way" is who is doing the looking. I don't see how Irans ambitions can be taken in isolation of Israels nuclear capacity or its vast arsenal of conventional weaponry supplied courtesy of the US taxpayer. All other powers in the region pale by comparison to that of Israel as was so clearly demonstrated in the Six Day War, and Israel has far more resources at its disposal now than it did back then.

I thought the Brazil deal put to Iran was a positive step forward. America is not trusted as an honest broker because it isn't an honest broker for Iran. From the superpower theatre of the Iran/Iraq war to the Shahs regime to more recent times.

As you said "normalization" of relations would be one way, but any normalization would require genuine change in US policy and funding towards Israel, which would not have the luxury of it's isolationism without that help. The last time anyone got close ended up with Rabin assassinated.

All those missiles fired by Hezbollah in 2006 - where did they come from? Iran, and some via Syria.

Of course, and we also know that Israel planned its attack on Lebanon with US approval just a couple of years ago using the kidnap of Gillad Shallit as the causus belli.

Sure, states sell arms to each other, and it's entirely possible that the US assisted Israel in its nuclear program back in the 70s, but Hezbollah is not a state. They could detonate a nuke or a dirty bomb in Tel Aviv with little fear of comparable reciprocation. And in such a scenario, Israel would have little option to retaliate against Iran instead.

Nuclear material getting into the hands of those likely to use it is a perpetual problem, but real peace comes through concilliation and people having environments where they have hope, prospects, hope for their kids future and a sense of justice. That's how the risk can really be reduced, because until those things start to happen, how can there be peace. Northern Ireland is a reasonable example of how things can be improved, but it takes time and goodwill on all sides.

[Pappa]

Or, conversely, if every country had nukes it might actually bring peace. It would be like a Mexican stand-off.

That would be totally MAD!

[Warren Dew]

Demographically, time is on the side of the world (and by world I mean pretty much every country outside Iran, all of whom don't care for the idea of a nuclear Tehran). The younger generations are more tech-savvy and modern, more interested in normal relations with the world, have no memory of the revolution, and don't buy into the constant government-line scapegoating of the "Great Satan" as much as the older generations did.

Wishful thinking only possible by ignoring the reality of Iranian demographics.

The only people whose "younger generation" fit your description is the urban elite. The majority of the people in Iran are rural or in small towns, strongholds of Islamic fundamentalism. Their younger generation absolutely buys into the government line, because they are the government's primary power base and they are the audience the government plays to.

As time passes, oil producing nations only gain in power relative to oil consumers like us. Time is definitely not on our side.

[Warren Dew]

So then give Iran the bomb.

Why is that a better solution than taking it away from Israel?