Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 11

IRAN 1

The Study of Irans Nuclear Weapons Program and How it affects the International Community Nicholas Gelles Writing For The Sciences, Period 9 January 8, 2008

IRAN 2 Abstract Throughout twenty-five years of strained relations, U.S. policy efforts have delayed but not thwarted Irans clandestine nuclear weapons program, largely because Washington has failed to influence Irans motivations for acquiring nuclear weapons. Iran continues to flaunt international law by developing a nuclear weapons capability. Up to this point UN resolutions and diplomatic overtures by the United States have failed to create change. In addition, President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has made many offensive claims, including a complete denial of the Holocaust and a threat to wipe Israel off the map.

IRAN 3 The Study of Irans Nuclear Weapons Program and How it affects the International Community Former Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel recently stated in a November 2007 interview that, America and the world must prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon. Iran, more precisely the government and leaders of the country, is one of the countries noted above. Iran's nuclear activities are continuing to cause concern in the Western nations. The Islamic Republics nuclear ambitions present probably the most troublesome problem facing United States foreign policymakers today. It is clear enough that the world will become a significantly more dangerous place if Iran, a radical Islamist state that actively supports international terrorism, succeeds in acquiring nuclear weapons. History of Irans Nuclear Weapons Program The foundations for Iran's nuclear program were laid after a 1953, CIA-supported coup that over threw the democratically-elected Prime Minister Mohammed Mossadegh and brought Shah (King) Mohammad Reza Pahlavi to power. By 1957, the West judged the regime sufficiently stable and friendly that nuclear proliferation would not become a threat. That year, a civil nuclear co-operation program was established under the U.S. Atoms for Peace program. In 1967, the Tehran Nuclear Research Center was established, run by the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran (De Luce, 2003). In March 1974, the Shah envisioned a time when the world's oil supply would run out, and declared, "Petroleum is a noble material, much too valuable to burn... We envision producing, as soon as possible, 23 000 megawatts of electricity using nuclear plants Then President Gerald Ford signed a directive in 1976 offering Tehran the chance to buy and operate a United States-built reprocessing facility for extracting plutonium from nuclear reactor fuel. The deal was for a complete nuclear fuel cycle. Iran, a U.S. ally then,

IRAN 4 had deep pockets and close ties to Washington. U.S. and European companies scrambled to do business there. On August 14, 2002, Alireza Jafarzadeh, a spokesman for an Iranian rebel group National Council of Resistance of Iran, revealed to the general public the existence of two nuclear sites under-construction: a uranium enrichment facility in Natanz ,part of which is underground, and a heavy water facility in Arak. It is possible that intelligence agencies already knew about these facilities but the reports had been classified. The International Atomic Energy Agency immediately sought access to these facilities and further information and co-operation from Iran regarding its nuclear program. France, Germany and the United Kingdom undertook a diplomatic initiative with Iran to resolve questions about its nuclear program. Under the terms of the Paris Agreement, on November 14, 2004, Iran's chief nuclear negotiator announced a voluntary and temporary suspension of its uranium enrichment program and the voluntary implementation of the Additional Protocol, after pressure from the United Kingdom, France, and Germany acting on behalf of the European Union. In early August 2005, Iran removed seals on its uranium enrichment equipment in Isfahan, which United Kingdom officials termed a "breach of the Paris Agreement."(Edgendorf, 2006) On April 11, 2006, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad announced that Iran had successfully enriched uranium. President Ahmadinejad made the announcement in a televised address from the northeastern city of Mashhad, where he said "I am officially announcing that Iran joined the group of those countries which have nuclear technology." Qolam Ali Hadadadel, speaker of Iran's parliament, said on August 30, 2006, that Iran had the right to "peaceful application of nuclear technology and all other officials agree with this decision," according to the semi-official Iranian Students News Agency. "Iran opened the door to negotiations for

IRAN 5 Europe and hopes that the answer which was given to the nuclear package would bring them to the table. (Edgendorf, 2006) Reasons why the Iranian Government continues its pursuit of Nuclear Weapons Iran claims it is threatened by Israel and the United States, but in reality those two states would not attack Iran unless it was developing or in possession of nuclear weapons. There are three main motivations behind Irans nuclear program. First, at the universal level, external threats drive Irans perceived need for a nuclear deterrent. (Bolten, 2003) Second, at the individual level, well placed governmental elites propel the nuclear security myth to spur support for nuclear weapons. Deeper analysis at the universal and individual levels reveals additional, more compelling reasons for Irans pursuit of nuclear weapons. At the universal level, Iran has chosen a defensive doctrine against threat nations equipped with nuclear, biological, and chemical weapons, and a deterrent doctrine against states with formidable conventional military capabilities. (Bolten, 2003) At the individual level, nuclear weapons appeal to power and popular will and convince leaders of the security imperative that can only be answered by developing or possessing nuclear weapons. Irans Support of Terrorism To call Iran a terrorist nation is a great understatement. It is the epicenter of Islamic jihadism. The Army of the Guardians of the Islamic Revolution, also known as Pasdaran, is the largest branch of the Islamic Republic of Iran's military. Like many young Iranians during the 1980-88 Iran-Iraq war, Iran's current president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was a member of the Guards. The Pasdaran is the Iranians regimes principal point of contact with the terrorist group Hezbollah, Iran created, equipped, and funded terrorist organization. Its control of the Iranian

IRAN 6 nuclear program raises the possibility that Irans nuclear advances could translate into substantial terrorist gains. President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad confirmed publicly that his government is prepared to provide nuclear technology to any number of other Muslim states. (Haugen, 2007) Nuclear Terrorism Of all the terrorist threats facing the United States and the world, perhaps the gravest is the possibility of terrorists constructing or obtaining a nuclear weapon and detonating it in a city. If a terrorist group exploded just one nuclear weapon, hundreds of thousands of people could die. Because there is no effective protection against a nuclear blast, the only real solution is to prevent terrorists from obtaining nuclear bomb materials or weapons in the first place. One month to the day after the 9/11 attacks, George Tenet, as Director of Central Intelligence, walked into the Oval Office to see President Bush to give the President's daily intelligence briefing and informed him that a CIA agent, code-named Dragonfire, reported that a ten-kiloton weaponthat is a small nuclear weapon that would fit in the back of a vanfrom the former Soviet arsenal was now in control of Al Qaeda and was in New York City. (Haugen, 2007) There was a moment of silence, a few deep breaths and then a series of questions. How the International Community Failed to stop Iran Someone once said that Democracy threatened anywhere, it is threatened everywhere. The reason for going to war needs to be just and can therefore be recapturing things taken or punishing people who have done wrong. Irans nuclear activities are continuing to cause concern in Western nations. Some people believe that not adhering to international policies could be justification for war with Iran. The Islamic Republics nuclear ambitions present probably the most troublesome problem facing U.S. foreign policymakers today. (Berman, 2005) It is clear enough that the world will become a significantly more dangerous place if Iran, a

IRAN 7 radical Islamist state that actively supports international terrorism, succeeds in acquiring nuclear weapons. What Actions the United States should take against Iran The world is a much smaller place today with all of the new advancements of telecommunications and technology. In my opinion, the United States must make sure that its intelligence gathering community is the finest the world has ever seen. As an example, there has been a constant reference back to the faulty intelligence that helped set the stage for the invasion of Iraq. Not all intelligence that we gather is one hundred percent accurate. It has to be corroborated with other intelligence reports. As always there are exceptions, like when there is a report that is time sensitive and it can not be double checked with other reports and has to be acted upon as quickly as possible. This does happen and sometimes this intelligence is wrong. Also, recent articles in the press indicate that Irans capability is not at the previously believed level. These articles stated that Iranian leaders tried to develop nuclear weapons until 2003, when United States led diplomatic pressure led them to halt it. The finding represented a striking about face from a 2005 intelligence report that said Iran was actively trying to build a bomb. These inconsistencies must be rectified. When it comes to the subject of nuclear weapons, the United States must get it right or some country or population will pay the price. All other options for the United States will flow from the intelligence reports. It is imperative that Irans leaders know that the United States, along with the world community will not tolerate a nuclear armed Iran. In fact, in August 2005, a former Central Intelligence Agency officer, claimed that United States Vice President Dick Cheney had instructed United States Strategic Command to prepare a contingency plan to be employed in response to Iran obtaining a functioning nuclear weapon.

IRAN 8 British philosopher John Stuart Mill once said that But war, in a good cause, is not the greatest evil which a nation can suffer. War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things: the decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling which thinks that nothing is worth a war, is much worse. War is often the best possible step toward peace. According to St. Augustines Just War Theory, there are three principles that the United States should adhere to in their dealings with Iran. In response to Irans blatant disregard of international laws by growing their nuclear weapons programs, the United States should increase their military presence in Iran if the following criteria are met: if it is a war that is in self defense, every conceivable means is taken to protect a non-combatant, and that war is the only option left. (Edgendorf, 2006) In war, every conceivable means should be taken to protect the non-combatants of the country. The United States has tried every process to avoid a war. Up to this point the United Nations resolutions and diplomatic overtures by the United States have failed to create any type of change. For example, the United States tried to reason with who the Iranian president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. The United States tried bargaining for the stop their pursuit of nuclear power in exchange for a relief package. This not the only time that the United States has stepped in to try and stop Iran. The only option that is left to stop Iran of further quest of nuclear weapons would be to go to war with them. This plan of action should only be followed if the United States has exhausted all other non-military measures. Conclusion In response to Irans blatant disregard of international laws be growing their nuclear weapons programs, the United States should increase their military presence in Iran if the following criteria are met: if it is a war that is in self defense, every conceivable means is taken

IRAN 9 to protect a non-combatant, and that was is the only option left. Therefore it is clear that the criteria of a just war have been met. In the particular instance, Iran has disregarded international law regarding nuclear weaponry. In conclusion, the United States should keep all of its options open in an attempt to prevent Iran from acquiring a nuclear capability.

IRAN 10 Reference Berman, I. (2005, November 15). Speech to the Committee on Senate Homeland Security and Government Affairs Subcommittee on Federal Financial Management, Government Information and International Security, Washington D.C. [Electronic Version]: Iran Poses a Serious Threat. Retrieved December 11, 2007, From Bethel Park High School Student Resource Center: http://find.galegroup.com/ovrc/informark.do?&contentSet= GSRC&type=retrieve&tabID=T010&prodID=OVRC&docId=EJ3010448206&source=ga le&srcprod=OVRC&userGroupName=beth92669&version=1.0 Bolton, M. (2003, December 2). Speech to the Conference of the Institute For Foreign Policy Analysis and the Fletcher Schools International Security Studies Program, Washington D.C. [Electronic Version]: The United States Must Prevent Iran from Developing Nuclear Weapons. Retrieved December 11, 2007, From Bethel Park High School Student Resource Center: http://find.galegroup.com/ovrc/informark.do?&contentSet= GSRC&type=retrieve&tabID=T010&prodID=OVRC&docId=EJ3010238239&source=ga le&srcprod=OVRC&userGroupName=beth92669&version=1.0 De Luce, D (2003, August 20). The spectre of Operation Ajax. The Guardian Egendorf, L. (2006). Iran is a Nuclear Threat. Opposing Viewpoints: Iran. Retrieved December 12, 2007, From Bethel Park High School Student Resource Center: http://find.galegroup. com/ovrc/informark.do? &contentSet=GSRC&type=retrieve&tabID=T010&prodID=OVRC&docId=EJ30104512 06&source=gale&srcprod=OVRC&userGroupName=beth92669&version=1.0

IRAN 11 Egendorf, L. (2006). The United States Must Use Military Strikes to End Irans Nuclear Weapons Program. Opposing Viewpoints: Iran. Retrieved December 12, 2007, From Bethel Park High School Student Resource Center: http://find.galegroup.com/ovrc/info rmark.do? &contentSet=GSRC&type=retrieve&tabID=T010&prodID=OVRC&docId=EJ30104512 17&source=gale&srcprod=OVRC&userGroupName=beth92669&version=1.0 Haugen, D, & Musser, S. (2007). The United States Should Attack Iran. Opposing Viewpoints: Iran. Retrieved December 12, 2007, From Bethel Park High School Student Resource Center: http://find.galegroup.com/ovrc/informark.do?&contentSet=GSRC&type=retrieve &tabID=T010&prodID=OVRC&docId=EJ30104522&source=gale&srcprod=OVRC&us erGroupName=beth92669&version=1.0 Schneider, B. (1999). NBC and Missile Proliferation Issues in the Middle East. Middle East Security Issues: In the Shadow of Weapons of Mass Destruction Proliferation. Maxwell Air Force Base, AL: Air University Press.

Vous aimerez peut-être aussi