Iran 's Incessant Quest For Nuclear Capabilities

With sources dating back to the late 1960s, North Korea’s nuclear weapons program has expanded to be a useful instrument of the government’s security. Its principal motivations for developing the nuclear weapons are as follows: to block foreign pressure, create an international impact and preserve the terms and conditions of the DPRK (ruling party of North Korea). In contrast, Iran 's motivations to develop strategic weapons appear to be more complex than that of North Korea. Iran 's efforts to develop nuclear, chemical and

On February 11th, 2010, President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad declared during a speech on the anniversary of the Islamic Revolution, that Iran has produced its first package of highly enriched Uranium. This was declared two days after beginning the process earlier that week. President Ahmadinejad said during his speech that Iran has succeeded in enriching uranium to twenty percent and has the ability to achieve a purity of more than eighty percent. (Flintoff) The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) had advised the United States and other United Nations (UN) Security Council nations on the possibility of an advanced nuclear development program in Iran. Iran has been consistently resistant to working with

With a renewed economy and enhanced military, if Iran elects to pursue a nuclear weapon in the future, critics argue they will be able to effectively withstand renewed sanctions and more ably protect centrifuge sights. Iran is also refusing to release details to the U.S. of its past nuclear activities, critics believe that the release of this information would finally disprove Tehran’s previous statements, that Iran was utilizing a peaceful program and that Islam forbids nuclear weapons. The ambiguity of Iran’s nuclear past has led to incomplete information on the part of the US and incomplete information in international relations is often a catalyst for military action. Furthermore, Critics believe that Iran will not entirely halt their nuclear program, but rather has significant incentive to misrepresent what they are developing, and will in fact work, in secret, on smaller-scale projects, such as specialized high-explosives that could act as a trigger in a nuclear bomb. Finally, according to many critics of this deal, the US is, in essence, allowing the Iranians, who in their opinion will have no incentive to abide by the limitations of this deal after they receive the pay out of lifted economic sanctions, to build a bomb. To them this

Nuclear weapons have provided states that possess them with the firepower to deter attacks since the United States developed the first bombs in the 1940’s. Those states with the abilities to develop such weapons have solidified themselves atop the global hierarchy. Since few states have such weapons, it is naturally attention grabbing when a nation is revealed to be in the process of developing them. Iran began a nuclear program in the 1950’s with the help of the United States, who suspended help after the Iranian Revolution in 1979 (Breachy and Sinha 1-3). After the monarchy was overthrown and replaced with a clerical Islamic government, many nations, especially the United States, began to fear that the Iranians were using their nuclear program to create weapons of mass destruction (Brachy and Sinha 10-13). Over the years, sanctions from the United States, the European Union, and other central powers, have crippled Iran’s economy. After the election of President Ahmadinejad in 2005, who supported the Iranian Nuclear program and offended Israel by calling the Holocaust a myth, many great powers have began to work with Iran in an attempt to retard its nuclear capabilities in return for a reduction of international sanctions. Many actors in these negotiations want different things. Iran would like to have the sanctions against it lifted while maintaining the ability to develop nuclear weapons. This would allow Iran to boost its position at the expense of others in the Middle

But recently, the International Atomic Energy Agency’s reported that the suspicion was more or less true of the Iran nuclear programme. Starting from 2003, Iran developed technologies that wear necessary for the nuclear weapons and it continued till 2009 but the operation was laid low to the outside world. After the sanction agreement with the US and with many years of discussion, finally on 2009, it is believed that Iran has stopped the nuclear programme altogether completely. When the intelligence examined carefully and critically, the explosives, bridge-wire and detonators, it was not a simply nuclear programme but rather like a war orientated operation. The Iranian government had a hard time answering the fact. Despite failing to come up clean on the accusation of the nuclear operation, reports accept that Iran has stopped its agenda and is walking along the

We already know that sometimes a world war or world domination is sparked through these things. Nobody wants to have less power than others. The Iran deal can be taking a wrong turn. We will never know until it happens. The world already has enough problems on their backs to burden such as: climate change, terrorists, unemployment, etc. A war with Iran, or possibly a World War 3 will just make everything worst. When Iran finally make these weapons, the US or any other country cannot tell what they can do with them. Nine is a big number, and if Iran tries to take down the "big game" countries with those bombs, Iran can be looking at world domination. . The United States believes that we would live in a "more secure world free from the threat

Especially interesting this week was the paper discussing a nuclear armed Iran and its consequences and many possible outcomes. Since America seems interested in paving the way for a nuclear Iran, I hope a complete analysis has been done, but fear that it has not; however, that is a discussion for another time. My personal thoughts and lessons learned is that the nuclear deterrent works when rational actors are involved as it did during the Cold War between the U.S. and the U.S.S.R. Unfortunately, radical Islamists, such as those controlling Iran, are not rational actors and I fear the threat of a nuclear terror attack will only increase over the next decade as they care little for regime preservation and only about a radical violent

A nuclear free Iran is the main objective. This policy transcends partisan divides within the American political system and between international hegemonic rivalries. A nuclear capable Iran is neither an American nor an Israeli problem. Rather, the community of nations must collectively ensure the end of Iran’s pursuit towards a weapon of mass destruction. The consequences of failure are unprecedented. Regional stability will deteriorate, global security will be undermined, and economic interests will be threatened. While there is a consensus on the policy, the road taken and tools used to mitigate the proliferation of a nuclear bomb is not as clear. Unilateral actions by the United States of America are not enough. Even if Western allies implement a strategy together - it is still not enough. The formation of a multilateral coalition is essential if Iran’s pursuit of a nuclear bomb is to be halted. A dual track approach that combines diplomatic negotiations with economic sanctions is the peaceful path required for the policy of a nuclear free Iran to be effective. Military engagement is a tool that remains on the table but should only be used when all other approaches are exhausted.

From the 1700 's to the 1900 's, humankind has gained much knowledge of nuclear energy, all of which started from mere curiosity to understanding the electrons, protons and neutrons. The knowledge gained over the span of 200 years was so vast that the humankind has evolved usage of nuclear energy from being beneficial to the humankind to becoming weapons of mass destruction. It has left the world leaders bewildered as to whether these advancements in development of nuclear weapons is for welfare of the country or it is to serve purposes that are far more dangerous than can be encompassed. But the enrichment of nuclear weapons each year by countries has definitely spurred the scientific community and these actions have been under scrutiny by the world leaders. In the present day world, out of 196 countries that exist on this planet, two countries have arisen to be the biggest threats all owing to nuclear weapons. North Korea and Iran joined this race of exponential development of nuclear weapons and have posed threats of all sorts to rest of the world with their constant development of nuclear weapons. In this race, the North Korea has definitely left Iran behind. Therefore, threat of nuclear war with North Korea is greater than with Iran. These countries have used their capability of nuclear weapons development to intimidate their foes

If the U.S. attacked Iran in a more conventional manner, like a ground invasion, the question of sovereignty and enforcement of international law is raised. Although the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty prohibits states without nuclear weapons from acquiring them, it is difficult to enforce international law, especially as states have sovereignty within their own borders. Only a few countries, including the U.S., are able to threaten and deter countries that violate international law. Because of this, often the only laws that are enforced are those that concern the most powerful countries. The International Atomic Energy Agency monitors and investigates countries to guarantee they are not acquiring nuclear weapons. Recently, the IAEA released a report saying there is a credible belief that Iran is trying to create a nuclear device; this has heightened tensions between Iran and the U.S. Also at stake is the United States’ reputation and position as a world

Recently the United States and several European nations entered into negotiations to release Iranian assets in exchange for assurances that Iran would do several things, including, reduce both their stockpiles of enriched Uranium and the number of Centrifuges. Additionally they are to convert one facility into a research center, cease activities related to any nuclear weapons projects, and submit to inspections of their nuclear facilities. There are several problems related to this agreement. Any of the issues alone would be troubling; together they should be a deal breaker.

Still, Iran continuously denies that its nuclear objectives are to construct atomic weapons, but a large majority of the international community remains skeptical to the legitimacy of this claim due to the secrecy of Iran’s productions and their refusal to cooperate with the IAEA on several notable occasions. However, in defense over the concerns pertaining to the secrecy of Iran’s program, Iran’s former ambassador to the United Nations, Mohammed Javad Zarif, claims Western tension and dwindling support for Iran’s early nuclear energy programs forced Tehran with no choice but to continue their nuclear activities in a discreet matter. Zarif wrote in Colombia University’s Journal of International Affairs, “To avoid the

Initially, it is important to clarify that necessity is an ‘indispensable thing’ , however, that can be down to perception and the rationale of the individual. The author believes the security of any state is the most important reason why a country has a nuclear weapon, this is based on a theory of realism, where it is believed that the international system is anarchic and states will do what needs to be done to protect their security. This reflects a need of being and feeling secure, where a nation will always want to do what is best to guarantee their safety. North Korea is an example of this. They state their reason for nuclear weapons is deterrence due to the threat of aggression from other countries around them, notably USA.

Other nations, such as Israel, are believed to have nuclear weapons, although there has been no official confirmation of this. For nearly seventy years, these questions have been asked, and many have attempted to answer these questions in their own way. Nuclear weapons, while horrifying, are necessary for the safety and security they provide, through deterrence and as a negotiating aid.

Recently, the IAEA has been extensively involved in three states including Iran, the focus of this paper. To understand why the Iran’s nuclear program became worrisome for the IAEA, a brief history and overview of the state’s nuclear program is necessary.