Why Iran Cannot Have Nuclear Weapons
Introduction
Iranian nuclear enrichment is a one of the key issues in the current convention of Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT). Ryoji Terayama stated that according to the United Nation Security Council Resolution 1696 in July, 2006, the United Nation Security Council called Iran to discontinue all nuclear activities such as uranium enrichment and reprocessing of plutonium. Then, in both December 2006 and March 2007, the Security Council eventually took economical sanctions toward Iran. However, Iran has not changed its behaviour towards nuclear weapons; Iran constantly asserts the peaceful use of atomic power and justifiable it in accordance with NPT. Thus, it uncertain whether or not Iran has acquired offensive nuclear weapons, and likewise it is unclear why the Security Council took such a sanction against Iran. Additionally, America has been observing Iran with a critical eye, despite the existence of other nuclear ‘rogue states’, such as Israel which is unofficially recognised as a nuclear state. In addition, Pakistan, India and North Korea are the states that do not accept the NPT and have acquired nuclear weapons. (Tateyama,n.d) Hence, a controversy arises over why Iran cannot have nuclear weapons—why only Iran is highly criticised.
Realists, as Clifton W. Sherrill argues that Iran’s nuclear enrichment will cause an imbalance in the states’ power and interrupts the interests. Neo-realists may say that it is not possible to maintain world security under these anarchy and security dilemmas, such as the nuclear double standard and the opacity. (Sherrill, 2012) Constructivists would argue that Iran has enough oil to maintain its citizens’ energy needs; it is irrational therefore, to let them have nuclear capabilities. Furthermore, Huge Gusterson argues that under the current unstable Islamic political regime, Iran does not have empirical conditions for nuclear weapons. Otherwise, the social order can easily be destroyed under the Iranian Islamist
Iranian nuclear enrichment is a one of the key issues in the current convention of Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT). Ryoji Terayama stated that according to the United Nation Security Council Resolution 1696 in July, 2006, the United Nation Security Council called Iran to discontinue all nuclear activities such as uranium enrichment and reprocessing of plutonium. Then, in both December 2006 and March 2007, the Security Council eventually took economical sanctions toward Iran. However, Iran has not changed its behaviour towards nuclear weapons; Iran constantly asserts the peaceful use of atomic power and justifiable it in accordance with NPT. Thus, it uncertain whether or not Iran has acquired offensive nuclear weapons, and likewise it is unclear why the Security Council took such a sanction against Iran. Additionally, America has been observing Iran with a critical eye, despite the existence of other nuclear ‘rogue states’, such as Israel which is unofficially recognised as a nuclear state. In addition, Pakistan, India and North Korea are the states that do not accept the NPT and have acquired nuclear weapons. (Tateyama,n.d) Hence, a controversy arises over why Iran cannot have nuclear weapons—why only Iran is highly criticised.
Realists, as Clifton W. Sherrill argues that Iran’s nuclear enrichment will cause an imbalance in the states’ power and interrupts the interests. Neo-realists may say that it is not possible to maintain world security under these anarchy and security dilemmas, such as the nuclear double standard and the opacity. (Sherrill, 2012) Constructivists would argue that Iran has enough oil to maintain its citizens’ energy needs; it is irrational therefore, to let them have nuclear capabilities. Furthermore, Huge Gusterson argues that under the current unstable Islamic political regime, Iran does not have empirical conditions for nuclear weapons. Otherwise, the social order can easily be destroyed under the Iranian Islamist
Bibliography: Aljazeera, America (2012) Israeli PM sets 'red line ' over nuclear Iran. Aljazeela, America, [online] 28/09. Available at: http://www.aljazeera.com/news/americas/2012/09/2012927154228135624.html. Ansari, A..M (2006) Confronting Iran. London: C.Hurst & Co. publisher Ltd,. BBC Middle East (2012) Q&A Iran Nuclear Issue. BBC Middle East, [online] 6/3/2012. Available at: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-11709428. Barkawai, T. and Laffey, M. (2006) The political moment insecurity studies. Cambridge Jornals. p.329-352. Available through: Review of International Studies http://jornals.ambridge.og.abstract_S0260210506007054. Ginsberg B. (1993) The Fatal Embrace: Jews and the State. University of Chicago, p. 1, 103. Gusterson, H. (1999) Nuclear Weapons and the Other in the Western Imagination. American Anthropology Association. Lawson, S. (2003) International Relations. USA: BlackWell Publishing Ltd, Maoz, Z Sunohara, T. (2010) 核がなくならない7つの理由 The 7 reasons why nuclear weapon cannot be abandoned ( by my translation) . Tokyo: Shincho Shinko.