In an article from the Nuclear Threat Initiative website, there is an overview of the issues at hand with Iran and their nuclear power programs. This article reviews the current issues on Iran and its nuclear power and the information that has been made known from Iran. Iran had become a party of the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons also known as the NPT since 1970 and declared themselves as being a non-nuclear weapon state. Since then they have still made advances in their nuclear power program, but they say it is only for peacefully purposes only. Due to Iran's failure to mention some of the details of their nuclear program to the International Atomic Energy Agency, other countries are wondering if they were being truthful with their intensions for their nuclear power and suspect that they may make advancements in nuclear weapons.
This article also refers to the known status of Iran's advancements in not only nuclear but also biological, chemical, and missile progress in Iran. Iran's nuclear power plants have been said to be for uranium enrichments, mining, milling, and conversion. Suspicions had risen when Iran had announced that they were in the talks of a second nuclear power plant and they were already looking for new grounds to build on. President Obama and President Rouhani had discussed the details on the issue and were hoping for some negotiations. Iran had suffered due to chemical weapons in the Iran-Iraq war so Iran had opened up their chemical facilities and destroyed their program because of these effects. The United States had accused them of having their program and having access to chemical blood, blister, choking, and nerve agents but Iran denied having any access to chemical power. This website was a great way to get a general understanding on the issue and to view the nuclear threat information on other countries in addition to Iran.
Link to the Article: http://www.nti.org/country-profiles/iran/
Wednesday, December 4, 2013
Tuesday, December 3, 2013
Would Iran having a nuke change anything?
The main use of nuclear weapons in recent times has been to serve as a deterrent against foreign aggression. The theory of mutually assured destruction has to an extent stabilized conflicts between global powers since WW2. On a regional scale, nuclear weapons have kept India and Pakistan from open warfare. So what makes the situation in the middle east different? Would the counterbalance of Israeli ( and US) military power with a nuclear armed Iran actually cause a decrease in tensions? If Iran did have a fully functional military arsenal, would they still resort to backing terrorist groups to exert their will? Or would the introduction of the bomb nullify their need for this lesser form of intimidation?
Furthermore, is it even necessary for Iran to HAVE a nuclear bomb in order to use nuclear annihilation as leverage? Even with the level of development their nuclear program has now, militant groups allied with Iran could be supplied with materials necessary to make a "dirty bomb". Is this significantly different from Iran being armed with a Nuclear missile? If Iran chose to do so, they could have a weapon of this sort on the way to Israel right now. The amount of damage possible with this less advanced weapon would still be devastating and destroy any chance of a peaceful resolution to Middle East conflict in the foreseeable future. The only reason I can fathom that they haven't yet unleashed such an attack, if their rhetoric is to be believed, is because they are rational enough to know that it would mean the destruction of their government / country. How would this situation change if they had a different form of atomic weaponry?
It seems to me that in many ways it's almost preferable for Iran to just flat out have a warhead to tout. This way, negotiations within the region between Israel and Iran would have to be made on a more balanced level. If Iran had a bomb, then there would be much less need for them to actually use it. If the feelings of encroachment by western powers is lessened in Iran by possessing the bomb, then perhaps the domestic politics would move away from such militant rhetoric. The use of terrorist groups would not be as necessary a vanguard for the Iranian interests in the region.
The end goal when dealing with Iran shouldn't be the subjugation of the country, but rather the normalizing of relations with them. The fact that they are branded as outsiders by the western world only enforces these views among the ruling class. By developing nuclear technologies, Iran will become comparable in capabilities to the other regional actors, lessening the need for extremism as a tool of political will.
Related article: http://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/137731/kenneth-n-waltz/why-iran-should-get-the-bomb
Furthermore, is it even necessary for Iran to HAVE a nuclear bomb in order to use nuclear annihilation as leverage? Even with the level of development their nuclear program has now, militant groups allied with Iran could be supplied with materials necessary to make a "dirty bomb". Is this significantly different from Iran being armed with a Nuclear missile? If Iran chose to do so, they could have a weapon of this sort on the way to Israel right now. The amount of damage possible with this less advanced weapon would still be devastating and destroy any chance of a peaceful resolution to Middle East conflict in the foreseeable future. The only reason I can fathom that they haven't yet unleashed such an attack, if their rhetoric is to be believed, is because they are rational enough to know that it would mean the destruction of their government / country. How would this situation change if they had a different form of atomic weaponry?
It seems to me that in many ways it's almost preferable for Iran to just flat out have a warhead to tout. This way, negotiations within the region between Israel and Iran would have to be made on a more balanced level. If Iran had a bomb, then there would be much less need for them to actually use it. If the feelings of encroachment by western powers is lessened in Iran by possessing the bomb, then perhaps the domestic politics would move away from such militant rhetoric. The use of terrorist groups would not be as necessary a vanguard for the Iranian interests in the region.
The end goal when dealing with Iran shouldn't be the subjugation of the country, but rather the normalizing of relations with them. The fact that they are branded as outsiders by the western world only enforces these views among the ruling class. By developing nuclear technologies, Iran will become comparable in capabilities to the other regional actors, lessening the need for extremism as a tool of political will.
Related article: http://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/137731/kenneth-n-waltz/why-iran-should-get-the-bomb
Iran's Hard-Liners Keep Criticism to Themselves
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/12/02/world/middleeast/irans-hard-liners-keep-their-criticism-of-nuclear-pact-to-themselves.html?ref=nuclearprogram&_r=0
This article discusses Iran's signing of a nuclear interim agreement with the United States and other world powers. In accordance with the pact, Iran has agreed to freeze parts of its nuclear agreement in exchange for economic relief for certain troubled sanctions. Almost everyone in attendance agreed with leaders who signed the pact, with the exception of hard-liners who's "ideology will not be undermined by some negotiations." (Mohammad Reza Naqdi, hard-line head of parliamentary Basij force) Critics are saying that the hard-liners are just biding their time, essentially waiting for something or someone to mess up so that they can put a stop to nuclear deal. Hard-liners have been in charge of several sanctions of the Iranian government for years, and the freezing of parts of the nuclear program is just a way of giving into the "Great Satan" that is the United States. While younger citizens happily accepted the deal, the hard-liners sat back, and their silence said just about everything.
Personally, I think the deal is a good thing. Freezing parts of Iran's nuclear program gives the rest of the world some peace of mind that nothing drastic will happen while negotiations are still taking place. Not having the full power of their nuclear program will make any radicals within the Iranian government a little more cautious before taking and dramatic measures to ensure that their country does not fall to the "Great Satan" and other western governments.
This article discusses Iran's signing of a nuclear interim agreement with the United States and other world powers. In accordance with the pact, Iran has agreed to freeze parts of its nuclear agreement in exchange for economic relief for certain troubled sanctions. Almost everyone in attendance agreed with leaders who signed the pact, with the exception of hard-liners who's "ideology will not be undermined by some negotiations." (Mohammad Reza Naqdi, hard-line head of parliamentary Basij force) Critics are saying that the hard-liners are just biding their time, essentially waiting for something or someone to mess up so that they can put a stop to nuclear deal. Hard-liners have been in charge of several sanctions of the Iranian government for years, and the freezing of parts of the nuclear program is just a way of giving into the "Great Satan" that is the United States. While younger citizens happily accepted the deal, the hard-liners sat back, and their silence said just about everything.
Personally, I think the deal is a good thing. Freezing parts of Iran's nuclear program gives the rest of the world some peace of mind that nothing drastic will happen while negotiations are still taking place. Not having the full power of their nuclear program will make any radicals within the Iranian government a little more cautious before taking and dramatic measures to ensure that their country does not fall to the "Great Satan" and other western governments.
Report: Iran Needs More Nuclear Power Plants
http://news.yahoo.com/report-iran-needs-more-nuclear-power-plants-135907384.html
In this article, Iran's nuclear chief, Ali Akbar Salehi says that Iran needs more nuclear power pants. Although the one the country holds already produces some 1,000 megawatts of electricity. In my opinion, I question the additional nuclear power. Is this much nuclear power really necessary? Salehi says that the additional power would help Iran reduce its carbon emissions and its consumption of oil, which seems to be the positive of the extra power. The country says the power is for peaceful purposes. But there is always the thought in the back of your head asking, could they make atmoic weapons with all this power?
This article displays Iran's purpose for the additional power but I can't help but wonder if there is any other intentions for all this nuclear power. I believe that this is how most of the Western countries are feeling. This article does a good job of showing Iran's purpose for the power but does not show other countries view points. While learning more about Iran's nuclear program, this article allows us to add to our previous knowledge.
Monday, December 2, 2013
Q&A: Iran Nuclear Crisis
In an article titled "Q&A Iran Nuclear Crisis" the BBC news site tries to give some background information on this nuclear crisis. The main points of the article is why Iran wants a nuclear program and why Western powers disagree with Iran. Iran claims that their nuclear program is for peaceful purposes and they have a right to nuclear energy. The United States and other Western countries are afraid that Iran plans to build nuclear weapons so this is why they want to stop Iran's nuclear program. After the election of President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad in 2005 talks between Iran and the Western powers were essentially halted. Since then the UN has placed economic sanctions on Iran in an effort to stop their nuclear power.
Based on this article it seems like Iran has other intentions for their nuclear program besides energy. In the article it mentions how some parts of the program were being kept secret and how Iran did not fully comply to the demands of inspections. The article however does not talk about Iran's viewpoint so it is difficult to see the whole picture of this crisis. As a starting point to learn more about the Iran nuclear crisis I think this article does a good job.
Link to the article:http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-11709428
Based on this article it seems like Iran has other intentions for their nuclear program besides energy. In the article it mentions how some parts of the program were being kept secret and how Iran did not fully comply to the demands of inspections. The article however does not talk about Iran's viewpoint so it is difficult to see the whole picture of this crisis. As a starting point to learn more about the Iran nuclear crisis I think this article does a good job.
Link to the article:http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-11709428
deal in place but threat still relevant
While deal has been made to loosen the economic sanctions on Iran, many still question Iran's intent for a nuclear program. Is it truly desired for alternate energy, or for geopolitcal power? Seemingly a "non- western" the illustrator has a unique view of the deal.(see his about segment pasted below and link to his page to see comments posted about this cartoon). I agree with his stance, that despite the "deal" that is in place, world power or at least a threat to be one is still very real, and Nuclear plans are likely to still in process and hidden. Additionally, the target remains Israel.
About Gado
Iran/Russian Relations
http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5hhcrce6P3nndOtngAos2BXFtGg0w?docId=68192b1e-dcd5-48a2-b394-453c131a12f0
This link shows an article about Iran and Russia having talks about Iran having a second nuclear power plant located in Bushehr where the country's only nuclear power plant is located. This plan of building this second plant with the help of Russia seems to be giving western powers and Israel unease foreseeing that this could possibly be a program that masks Iran making secretly making weapons. However, Iranian officials are denying these allegations and saying this this program is for peaceful purposes.
I think that this article is very interesting mainly because Russia is involved. Considering that the Cold War ended years ago and that we are on good terms with Russia, it is can still be suspect that the Russians are helping Iran whose government doesn't get along with ours and the Russians are helping them with a nuclear project whether it be for making weapons or even just a peaceful program that will help Iran in the long run, energy-wise; everything does seem to look suspicious over in Iran.
This link shows an article about Iran and Russia having talks about Iran having a second nuclear power plant located in Bushehr where the country's only nuclear power plant is located. This plan of building this second plant with the help of Russia seems to be giving western powers and Israel unease foreseeing that this could possibly be a program that masks Iran making secretly making weapons. However, Iranian officials are denying these allegations and saying this this program is for peaceful purposes.
I think that this article is very interesting mainly because Russia is involved. Considering that the Cold War ended years ago and that we are on good terms with Russia, it is can still be suspect that the Russians are helping Iran whose government doesn't get along with ours and the Russians are helping them with a nuclear project whether it be for making weapons or even just a peaceful program that will help Iran in the long run, energy-wise; everything does seem to look suspicious over in Iran.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)