Just to recap and provide a little information about the implications of the IAEA plan regarding Iran's nuclear program here's a video! The video is from CNN. This is Mohamed ElBaradei's, the director-general of the International Atomic Energy Agency, remarking on how Iran's views the proposed nuclear plan. He also says that this plan would help ease tensions with Iran and the US.
There still has not been an official statement from Iran regarding the deal created by the IAEA with the help of the US and other countries that would propose Iran to send most of its uranium to other countries in order to be enriched. Repeatedly the United States has urged Iran to accept this deal. This proposal is meant to build trust between Iran and the United States because it would ensure the US what sort and the amount of uranium Iran is receiving. This delay has caused leaders to question Iran's intention for the future of its Nuclear Program. But there is another side to Iran nuclear program other than nuclear energy. Just recently there has been a report stating that Iran is experimenting with nuclear warheads, called a "two-point implosion" device. The IAEA is questioning how Iran obtained the details to build such a device. This only adds greater tension to Iran's diplomatic future. Some may want to use military action on Iran, but this will not help in the long run. If there is evidence suggesting that there is an immanent threat from Iran, then military action might be an option, but for the time being the best thing to do is to increase negotiations and connections with Iran.
However, the future of negotiations might come to a stand still. In Iran there are many internal conflicts that are getting in the way of decision making (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/11/05/AR2009110504439_pf.html). There is tension in Iranian politics, on both sides, arguing how President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad should engage with the West regarding Iran's nuclear program (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/03/world/middleeast/03iran.html?_r=1&ref=middleeast). There are some politicians in Iran who wants Ahmadinejad to have a tougher stance with the West, while the potential to improve relations with the United States is on the line. Iran's delay in answering does not give Iran a positive light on how it may react in future negotiations. The US needs to firm with its goals of Iran's nuclear program, but the US needs to do it in a respectable way and should understanding Iran's wishes. But in order to achieve transparency and truthfulness regarding Iran's nuclear program, goals must be accomplished. The United States must remain positive, but should not slack on its goal of achieving a respectable and constructive relationship with Iran.
I agree that the US is walking a very fine line between security and relations with Iran, but at some point the US needs to say that enough is enough and take the hard stance that all of their rhetoric implies. Simply refusing to talk to a nation doesn't cut it anymore. I hope that this turns out well, but having a volatile nation in possession of long range nuclear weapons, or the technology to produce them cannot be good for US security in the long run.
ReplyDelete