Nuclear Iran Research Paper

Iran’s Development of Nuclear Weapons If Iran were to obtain nuclear bombs, would there be any stopping the irresponsible, irrational country? With the popular foreign policy being one of proliferation fatalism towards Iran’s nuclear development, several countries in the international community question how a nuclear Iran would respond to threats of harsher sanctions. The issue of a nuclear Iran is extremely important, because several international countries worry how a nuclear Iran would affect Middle Eastern relations. These exaggerated perceptions; however, are exactly what is causing the nuclear buildup in Iran. In “How to Keep the Bomb from Iran”, Scott Sagan argues that crippling preemptive actions would not only stop Iranian nuclearization,
but ensure international security by removing a potentially unstable threat. The issue with this theory is that it requires war, or some other type of governing body which would increase political tensions between Iran and its surrounding countries, with Israel being the most unstable relationship that would be put in jeopardy. Sagan is wrong in his opinion regarding the allowance of a nuclear Iran, is correct in standing by the principles and threats made to Iran, and is correct in shifting the focus from Iranian regime change to ensuring Iranian security.

Sagan states in his argument that, “Governments typically pursue nuclear power for one of three reasons: to protect themselves against an external security threat, to satisfy the parochial interests of domestic actors, or to acquire an important status symbol” (Sagan 99). With growing accusations against Iranian involvement in supporting terroristic groups, it is easy to condemn any viable means of nuclear power for the state. Israel is believed to have nuclear capabilities, and have displayed their power several times defending themselves. It is this display of power that can be to blame for Iran’s pursuit of nuclear capabilities; the country needs to defend itself. While past governments have proven parts of Sagan’s argument to be somewhat true, history has shown that when countries acquire nuclear power, they tend to “feel increasingly vulnerable and become acutely aware that their nuclear weapons make them a potential target in the eyes of major powers. This awareness discourages nuclear states from bold and aggressive behavior” (Waltz 4). Sagan may be slightly correct in his thesis of why countries pursue nuclear power; however, Sagan fails to acknowledge several significant variables that contribute to a country’s arms race. The United States has long been an advocate for democracy, but an attitude of proliferation fatalism has led to the ignorance of maintaining promises and threats to rogue countries, this is especially true with the Iranian situation.

Secondly, Sagan states that “A better source of inspiration for dealing with Iran would be the 1994 Agreed Framework that the United States struck with North Korea” (Sagan 106).
The Agreed Framework was an agreement to stop North Korea from developing nuclear weapons, and in return the United States would provide the necessary means to substitute those nuclear facilities with those that would produce clean energy to power the country. More importantly, the agreement signified America’s ideals of maintaining promises. The opposite proved to be true, as the United States failed to uphold its part of the agreement, and nine years later the agreement broke down, resulting in North Korea’s withdrawal from the agreement; this failure would provide North Korea with the motivation to pursue nuclear power once again. Unfortunately, nine years after the failed agreement, the United States has failed in keeping promises to Iran. It’s possible that Iranian rebellion is a response to the strict sanctions and failed promised made to it by the United States. The question still remains, how would a nuclear Iran affect the well-being of the world? Because the U.S. hasn’t been able to break to the Iranian government for reasons like not upholding its promises, no one knows the true reason why Iran is in pursuit of nuclear power. However, on thing is important- If America wishes to reach improved foreign relations with Iran, and then it must begin to work towards keeping its word and allowing
the rogue state to regain political control of its country once more.

Lastly, Sagan states that in order to change Iran, the United States must change their approach from regime reform in order to focus on the security and issues of the country itself.
Even amidst all of the chaos in the Middle East, two “…historic rivals India and Pakistan signed a treaty agreeing not to target each other’s nuclear facilities…Since then, even in the face of deterrent was the instability produced by challenges to it” (Waltz 5). It’s apparent that countries who appear to be instable are actually the opposite; these countries behave in this way as a response to the oppressive sanctions placed upon them by foreign countries. In Iran’s case, the best possible approach to dealing with their pursuit of nuclear power is to leave them alone. If America wishes to let Iran back take control of their country, then it must be in conjunction with the country-not oppressing it so that rebellion can take over the “unstable”
nation.
Allowing the nuclearization of Iran would not only prove to be a strategically sound move, but would allow the fatal conflicts to subside, since international policies and governments would be watching the every move of a nuclear Iranian state. As Kenneth Waltz brilliantly said, “…policy makers and citizens in the Arab world, Europe, Israel, and the United States should take comfort from the fact that history has shown that where nuclear capabilities emerge, so, too, does stability” (Waltz 5). Iran’s security insecurities would be discarded due to its nuclear capability, its involvement as an active member in the international community would increase substantially, which would allow the Iranian government time to focus on internal issues rather than being oppressed by foreign policies. The solution is quite simple with respect to Iran- allow them the opportunity to obtain nuclear power, so that the welfare of the world as a whole is guaranteed.