From James Chadwick’s discovery of the neutron in 1932 to plutonium being using in the Manhattan Project in 1942. Nuclear power and its origins have been haunting as well as caught in phrases such as, “for the better of man-kind.” It allows energy to be harnessed, controlled, then directed to help produce electricity for homes in the numbers of millions so why not bring it to people in a 3rd world country?
The question would go as follows: with nuclear power would Iran seek to create nuclear weapons based on the defense of protecting its people? Situations such as these have presented themselves throughout human history; there is the claim that history often repeats itself. Even the elder Fidel Castro remarked on Iranian nuclear power being just one more step towards a weapon being developed in the Middle East.
Civilian purposes only have been said throughout the Iran’s response to foreign countries. The West has continually put tougher and tougher sanctions on Iran to prevent weapons being developed, with US leading the charge. However in recent events it was believed that through these tough sanctions could nuclear power be allowed, on the radar of UN nuclear watchdog the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and being controlled by Russian engineers there are clear facts that Iran creating a bomb would be unlikely to never happening.
A clear fact for Iran to cooperate with the globe would be to begin talks with a EU representative, Lady Ashton, who would host these meetings either in Switzerland or Turkey. This stale mate has been going for over a yearlong delay now and many EU officials feel that even with a day or two of talks they would be able to get “sufficient time for a full and in-depth exchange of views.” These views, which would involve civilian purposes only, have been the only reason the West allowed giving Iran nuclear power; even with having four sanctions made towards Iran to slow the process of developing nuclear power anytime soon.
Opponents, such as Mousavi, to the current president of Iran have remarked, “These sanctions have weakened the national economy.” The longer Iran withdraws from talks, the longer and harder it will be to get through the sanctions. Just a few weeks ago Iran had to make large cuts on different subsidy programs. Programs that have been with Iran for a long time and Mr. Ahmadinejad has stated this reform to be, “the biggest economic plan in the past 50 years.” The Iranian government will be giving the poorer families payouts to lessen the blow of these lifts on subsidies.
With Iran being to look like a mixed message, the West can only hope and wait. The US believes the longer the Iran takes its time to begin peaceful talks on developing nuclear power the more money Iran will need to give back into the global nuclear program. Iran isn’t a country know for producing massive amounts of money. In this journalist view Iran would be able to create nuclear weapons, or to claim what our former president said, “weapons of mass destruction,” but in the event that weapons would develop, how would they launch it, probably by having five-hundred Iranians pick it up and throw it at us. There isn’t a need to respond with violence just because nuclear power has been made as a source of electricity. Why hold off on allowing a likely 3rd world country to create power for their people through means of nuclear development. Yes there are many a case to argue that it nuclear war to happen, but that is why these talks are key, so that we, the people of the world, can come to an understanding and only by confrontation will an understanding be reached.
Even on our soil, the US is seeking peaceful talks with Russia on decreasing the nuclear stockpile of weapons in years to come. Why not allow weapons to be taken out of the equation on nuclear development and get involved with the process of friendly nuclear power being used in a 3rd world country.
Why are there so many conflicts in the Middle East for us in the Western part of the world anyway? What do we need to have out in those deserts that is so great. The likely answer for that is oil. The West is addicted to that substance like an addict is to drugs. I guess a key point in these debates is that whoever controls the nukes will control the oil being developed in the Middle East. So much for peace talks, but who would want to have peace talks with a guy who remarked that we in the West should bury ourselves and our leaders.
It doesn’t make sense to someone as young as myself. I have always looked towards environmental friendly ways of producing energy for people. I figure Iran is a desert with lot of sun, so solar energy would be abundant. Where can I find the beginning of a sentence to portray my argument that oil and nuclear power is bad in the long run to Iran? Probably no where because oil is the main of the game that is being played in all countries that involve the Middle East.
So should we in the West be more concerned, not really because Israel is right at the doorstep of the Middle East and one of our major allies over seas so if war were to break out across borders then a military conflict will surely ensue but weapons of nuclear proportion being used would be very unlikely because Iran isn’t close to developing them. Once talks have happened then the West will have a better understanding has to what Iran is accomplishing. Russia also is a huge role player because of how the Bushehr reactor is under Russia engineers’ hands. Making any side procedure for power being converted to making weapons would be very unlikely.
With electricity beginning to spread in different parts of Iran for 2011 it is portrayed by Iran that a victory over its enemies was accomplished, even though the enemies probably allowed the, “go-ahead,” to happen. Sanctions were tough, yes, but even with them piling up on Iran’s doorstep it still allowed to develop nuclear power. These purposes are hopefully peaceful in the long run. Nuclear war is something many would hope to avoid in humanities lifetime.
It would be the Cold War all over again if Iran would to claim it had nuclear weapons and made treaties with North Korean or other countries considered by the West to be the, “bad guys.” I don’t believe Iran will develop a weapon anytime soon and even if they do, what would they do with it. Iran is very far behind on the technology edge of the world market. So Iran and the West, mostly the US, being unable to reach an understanding until the talks, is it likely Iran will bring nuclear weapons to the discussion. No, plain and simple because if Iran would even try to make treats such as that then a world of hurt would come in the weeks to follow with sanctions being made towards Iran’s nuclear program and cripple the already damaged Iranian economy.
Nuclear power has been a part of our history and where our energy comes from for many decades to have been or to become so my hope for the future generations would be to state that peaceful methods are necessary for understanding to be reached and for understanding to be reached there must be peaceful confrontation on talks and exchanging views towards a talk about nuclear power being developed in countries that would not be able to develop nuclear power on their own.
Source: Mohsen Asgari, BBC News, Tehran
Source: Jon Leyne, BBC Tehran correspondent
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-11653749
