EDITORIAL: Of course Iran wants nukes
Many who lived through it described the Cuban Missile Crisis as 13 days of unbroken terror.
The line separating international diplomacy from global destruction at the tips of nuclear-armed intercontinental ballistic missiles was never thinner.
While the arms race continued between the West and the East after the crisis was resolved, treaties against further nuclear proliferation and limiting stockpiles became common.
It seemed like we learned our lesson: We must all strive for diplomacy, yet grimly acknowledge the necessary evil of nuclear deterrence in a world where nations can be obliterated at the press of a button.
But now the global community seems to be rushing toward a similar breaking point by throwing ultimatum after ultimatum at Iran and its nuclear development program.
Israel, the United Nations Security Council and many other international entities have cried foul at the program that Iran claims is only for peaceful development of medicine and electricity.
This is obviously false — Iran wants nukes. But why would it not?
Iran is surrounded by nuclear powers all allied amongst themselves — not the least of which is Israel, which refuses to confirm or deny the presence of its substantial nuclear weapons program.
Israel has not signed anti-nuclear proliferation treaties simply because it does not acknowledge it has any nuclear weapons to regulate.
How can we expect Iran to be content without atomic weaponry when one of its closest and most aggressive enemies possesses an arsenal to which the rest of the world turns a blind eye?
This editorial board in no way condones any of the actions of Iran’s dictatorial and oppressive leadership, but it does recognize a sovereign nation’s right to defend itself.
Why are we so afraid to let Iran join the nuclear club? Because we call them evil?
Moral labels are no excuse to refuse to recognize the perspective of a country which very correctly has an “us against the world” mentality.
We may disagree with Iran and find some of its actions contemptible, but it is not run by madmen. Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad knows as well as anyone else that a nuclear first strike is an invitation for annihilation.
The only compelling reason to block Iran’s nuclear development to the point of war would also call for the eventual “liberation” of the country either way.
To this idea, we need only recall the invasion and occupation of Iraq.
Nearly a decade and the loss of tens of thousands of young Americans later, we leave a questionably self-sufficient and unstable “democracy” in our wake.
Lasting national change can only come from within, and for every act of aggression the international community takes against Iran, its leaders become more justified in their isolation.
To the war hawks of the U.S. and beyond, please separate your pride from your worldview and weigh how much we stand to lose from another war fought under the banner of “global security.”
It’s not worth it.
