The leaders of IRAN: are they as crazy as it seems nowadays?

[Dinner]

Originally posted by GePap
The question is, why should any medium powers continue to abide by the NPT if rich states can all of a sudden decide they will make demands of states that go beyond what they are required to do according to the treaty. Iran violated the NPT by having secret facilities and incomplete monitoring, but its is absurd to demand Iran give up its right to enrich uranium.

Perhaphes but if they're told "give it up or else Z, B, and C will happen to you" then there isn't really much the Iranians can do about it other then complain. They can talk until they are blue in the face about how unfair it is but if the world's rich nations decide Iran is full of a bunch of nutters whom we don't like then they're pretty much ****ed. Economic sanctions followed by aerial bombing & naval blockade should should be more then enough to bully them into doing what we want.

[Sikander]

Originally posted by Flubber
I take it as a given that EVERY nuclear power prefers that no other nations get the nuke.

The U.S. largely supplied the Brits with their bomb, and the Chinese supplied the Pakistanis with theirs, and the Pakistanis supplied North Korea, Iran and Lybia with varying degrees of support in developing their own programs. So your given shouldn't really be a given.

[Proteus_MST]

Of course there could be a number 4#:

Irans President uses Israel and the uranium, to distract the iranian population from any internal problems, iran might face at the moment (economic crisis and the like),
so that the iranian people might turn their attention to the evil western states (and the jews) instead of critizizing their president.

[Lazerus]

#2, though in time i think they will also up the aggression against Israel.
Thats when the ****s really gonna hit the fan, the super-powers won't act because they're in no immediate danger, Israel would be.

[TheStinger]

Originally posted by Sikander


The U.S. largely supplied the Brits with their bomb, and the Chinese supplied the Pakistanis with theirs, and the Pakistanis supplied North Korea, Iran and Lybia with varying degrees of support in developing their own programs. So your given shouldn't really be a given.

The UK gave all are info on nuclear weapons to the US which greatly helped the Manhattan project, IIRC we were entitled to the info gained form Los Alomos althought he US renaged on that deal and we had to develop out own bomb form what nuggets we were given and what we ontained through our own reearch and other methods, The US then gave us the missle technology for our sub launched stuff but the warheads were our own.


The other point I would make is that countries like Japan and Germany despite signng the NPT could almost certainly build a bomb if thay wanted to in no time at all and the whole idea of the NPT is problamatical when other countires still have them

[Proteus_MST]

Yep, it´s a problem to argue against states developing nukes, if there are still states possessing them, some of them so much that they could make earth uninhabitable multiple times.

And the recent announcements of people from the current Bush administration about planning to develop new smaller tactical nukes (nuclear bunker busters and the like) make finding arguments why other states should obey the NPT even harder.

[Sikander]

Originally posted by TheStinger


The UK gave all are info on nuclear weapons to the US which greatly helped the Manhattan project, IIRC we were entitled to the info gained form Los Alomos althought he US renaged on that deal and we had to develop out own bomb form what nuggets we were given and what we ontained through our own reearch and other methods, The US then gave us the missle technology for our sub launched stuff but the warheads were our own.


The other point I would make is that countries like Japan and Germany despite signng the NPT could almost certainly build a bomb if thay wanted to in no time at all and the whole idea of the NPT is problamatical when other countires still have them

I never heard about a double-cross regarding the bomb, but I do remember reading about some pretty serious cooperation and the missles. Interesting.

[TheStinger]

I htink some of the uS refusal was down to their (correct as it turned out) suspicion that British intelligence was full of soviet spies.

[lord of the mark]

"They want the nuke. Why are they toying with us, well, they want to win time. With any more diplomatic step, they win time, because the west, being split up between the US on one side and the EU-3 consisting of Germany, France and the UK on the other side, doesn't get a united act together but keeps on debating. The tone is getting sharper on our side, but does anybody have to count on us? Will we ever get the UNSC in, with the support of China and Russia doubtful? So they're playing time, they think it's on their side, because once they get the nuke, they'll be safe. They think along the lines of NK."


The problem with this line of thinking, is that their actions and statements are undermining this strategy. They are doing their level best to get the EU and the US back together, openly defying and humiliating the EU-3, even going so far as not to show up for promised meetings. Even Russia is showing signs of getting fed up, and I think one of todays articles even mentioned China expressing its concern with Irans strategy. If they WANTED to lose Russian and Chinese support on the UNSC its not clear they could do a much better job than they are now doing. Their holocaust denial and Israel destruction statements, their continued support for terrorist groups that aim to stop any conceivable ME peace process, etc are NOT things that make it easier for Russia and China to support them. And IF you were rationally pursuing a bomb for realpolitik reasons, youd want to do your best to make it easier for Russia and China to support you.


Another explanation is that elements in the regime WANT to be isolated, in order to rally the nation - and overcome growing discontent with the regime.

Edit - i note proteus said something similar.

[lord of the mark]

its not at all clear whats happening internally in Iran

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/4594104.stm

[lord of the mark]

BEIJING (Reuters) - China has offered to help rein in Iran's nuclear ambitions and ease U.S. complaints about pirated goods ahead of a Washington visit by President Hu Jintao expected in mid-April, visiting U.S. congressmen said on Wednesday.

The chairman of China's National People's Congress, Wu Bangguo, told the congressmen China "agreed that they (Iran) should not have nuclear weapons, and agreed to working with the United States and especially the EU3" on Iran, Mark Kirk, a Republican Congressman from Illinois, told reporters.

Wu is a member of the nine-member Communist Party Standing Committee that makes the country's key decisions. The EU3 refers to Britain, France and Germany, which steer EU policy on Iran's nuclear programme.

On Tuesday, Iran resumed nuclear fuel research Washington and Brussels say could eventually be used to make nuclear weapons.

The five permanent members of the U.N. Security Council, including China, recently sent letters to Iran warning against restarting the nuclear activitie

[Ecthy]

@Proteus, LOTM: Maybe that's their *domestic* incentive to this policy, that doesn't explain their theory on what will happen internationally. My question was merely oriented towards their internationa lends, not their domestic ends.

They clearly won't risk being bombed and, possibly, invaded just to stabilize domestics?

[Ogie Oglethorpe]

When did Israel publicy admit having nukes?

[Flubber]

Originally posted by Edan


It's pretty politically niave to assume that any nation treats all other nations as equal.

and I am far from naive . I wasn't referring to any given nation treating other nations equally, I was speaking about equality before international law. Prior to the NPT I can't imagine that there would be anything else that would/dictate to nationstates which ones could and could not have nukes

[Flubber]

Originally posted by Edan


Given that the vast majority of medium power states continue to abide by the NPT, there must be some reason.

The reason for many nations is that they simply do not wnat to have nukes and have no security interest in obtaining them. I'm sure countries like Canada or Sweden would be able to develop the bomb but their governments would never even think to do so.