Feb 14, 2010:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/8514772.stm
Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton, announces that the US would be open to peaceful relations with Iran, but will not be able to do so while Iran is developing nuclear weapons. Iran claims that it is enriching uranium to 20% in order to generate electricity to export oil more efficiently. However, the fact that uranium can be enriched from 20% to 90% (nuclear weapon) in just six months worries world powers. For this reason, the powers of the West have been encouraging Iran to cease nuclear ambitions, and the US government wants the United Nations Security Council to impose sanctions on Iran’s nuclear developments.
This brings up the debate about the power of institutions, in this case the United Nations. Will the United Nations be able to sway Iranian nuclear policy, or will Iran continue to enrich uranium, even to dangerous levels. What kind of influence does the United Nations have in this area of discourse, and is it significant enough to put pressure on Iran to slow down their nuclear objectives?
I believe that the United Nations as an institution will not succeed in forcing Iran to slow down uranium enrichment, but that, if anything, the countries in the UN will put enough pressure on Iran, perhaps through certain trade restrictions, for them to contain their enrichment to safe levels.
I always worry about the stance of the US towards Iran's nuclear program. Iran's only goal in creating a nuclear weapon (which I'm still not convinced is their actual goal) would be to assert its importance in Arabia, and the only reason that it feels a need to do this is because Iran has been marginalized by sanctions championed by the US. This policy of removing Iran from the rest of the world hasn't worked in the last three times we've tried it, what makes us think it will work now? Perhaps there is a reason that the phrase "fourth time's the charm" doesn't exist?
ReplyDelete