A New Iran Nuclear Deal & American Hypocrisy
- Mila McGonigal
- Apr 27
- 3 min read
Just hours ago, the third round of Iran-US nuclear talks concluded in Muscat, Oman. Despite the Iranian party leaving “hopeful, but extremely cautious”, this recent string of Iran-US negotiations serves as a reminder of the United States’ deep hypocrisy.
A New Era of American Refusal to Compromise
In the American right-wing government’s attempt at creating a less compromising version of President Obama’s 2015 JCPOA by trying to shut down Iran's uranium enrichment entirely, President Trump appears both delusional and strongly hypocritical.
Surely, the US is in no place to criticize the threat of nuclear use or war. They are not only the only country to have ever deployed atomic weapons (in Hiroshima and Nagasaki), but have also been involved in some of the closest calls to nuclear war: notably, the Korean War (1950) and the Cuban Missile Crisis (1962).
The US can thus hardly say that it encourages denuclearization - that is, until, of course, it concerns a Middle Eastern state. A muslim nation. A counter-power to Israel. A state that would inspire other nations to seek nuclear weapons - other muslim nations: Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates, Turkey, and Egypt.
Moreover, President Trump knows the pressure is on like never before, with Israel hawk-eyeing every moment of the talks as PM Netanyahu makes Israel's expectations loud and clear. Israel’s hyper-defensiveness, especially since the October 7th attacks, has sparked an era of aggressiveness. Israel has been even more assertive than the United States in its promise to militarily retaliate if Tehran does not fully meet negotiation conditions.
Iran continues to insist on its need to enrich uranium, which the US has been forcefully combating. Iran insists on the use of nuclear power for civilian purposes, which can be vital for the energy, health, industry, and agriculture sectors of a state. Stripping Iran of this asset could deeply harm the country, especially on top of Trump’s brutal sanctions that have crippled the Iranian economy.
A Better Middle East?
And what if Iran wants more than a civilian nuclear program? It is imperative to remember that nuclear weapons hold little offensive power. Their capacity for mass destruction renders war extremely unlikely, or is therefore unlikely when nuclear weapons are present.
History suggests that nuclear weapons could have prevented previous conflicts. If Saddam Hussein had possessed nuclear weapons in 2003, the United States would arguably not have invaded Iraq. The same could be said for the invasion of Libya in 2011. We know that NWS (nuclear weapons states) are respected and left alone in a way that NNWS (non-nuclear weapons states) are not. North Korea should be thought of as an example here. Despite serious human rights concerns and UN inquiries into human rights violations, no nation has (or will) interfere with North Korean affairs due to the protection of their nuclear blanket.
Suppose Iran were able to possess such weapons. In that case, it is unlikely that Israel would continue to bully its Middle Eastern counterparts, or that there would ever be another Iran-Iraq war, or that the United States would continue to threaten the nation.
Hypocrisy on Display
In the end, if the US is not going to discuss worldwide denuclearization, then we are forced to discuss proliferation. Nuclear weapons can be stabilized. Iran’s acquisition of nuclear power could act not only as a stabilizing force in the Middle East but also as a broader emblem of changing times: a weakening United States, the end of a unipolar world, and the shift toward a multipolar one.
Photo Credit:
[Header]: EuroNews
[Embedded 1]: AP/Getty Images
Sources:
Comments