0
It is evident that Iran's efforts are focused both on uranium enrichment and a parallel plutonium effort. Iran claims it is trying to establish a complete nuclear fuel cycle to support a civilian energy program, but this same fuel cycle would be applicable to a nuclear weapons development program. Iran appears to have spread their nuclear activities around a number of sites to reduce the risk of detection or attack. This seems to be the reason.
Wiki User
∙ 14y ago
Wiki User
∙ 13y agoThis is debatable. To start, there is in fact no solid evidence that Iran has a military nuclear program running side-by-side its legal civilian nuclear program. The National Intelligence Estimate on Iran in 2007 (a NIE is a report that all of the members of the IC, Intelligence Community, get together to write on a single topic) stated with a "high level of confidence" that Iran had stopped its weaponization program in 2003 and had not restarted it. That said, if Iran does in fact have nuclear military power ambition, there are a number of reasons why America opposes it.
1. Non-Proliferation. The Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty is essentially comprised of three major points: first, that all signatories are allowed civilian nuclear energy technology, second, non-nuclear powers cannot build nuclear weapons (with the IAEA in charge of verification), and third, that the current nuclear powers pledged to "work in good faith" to reduce their nuclear arsenals to zero. The proliferation of nuclear weapons tends to force others to gain nuclear weapons; the USSR in response to the US; China, UK, and France in response to the USSR; India in response to China; and Pakistan in response to India, would be the best examples. The other two nuclear states (North Korea and Israel) perceive themselves to be relatively isolated and the target of large amounts of hostility and procured nuclear weapons to protect themselves. An Iranian acqusition of nuclear weapons could prompt others (such as Saudi Arabia, Turkey, UAE, or Egypt) to seek their own, which would in turn make others want them, etc. Currently there are only 5 countries that are not signatories to the NPT: Israel, North Korea, Pakistan, India, and Taiwan (who abides by the treaty but cannot sign it as China does not recognize Taiwan as an independent state). If Iran acquires nuclear weapons it could completely destroy the framework of the NPT.
2. Iran and the US are not friendly. The US, in its actions, has allowed others to gain nuclear weapons. It considers Pakistan and India close friends, and has a "special relationship", "unbreakable bond", with Israel, all three "illegal nuclear states" by the definition of the NPT. In practice, the only thing having a nuclear weapon does is limit the military freedom of neighboring states (and the US, which has significant projection power) - which is good when the states are states the US believes it can trust and is close with - but is bad when it is a state that you do not have diplomatic relations with.
3. Israel. There are two lines of thought on this. The more academic line of thought is that Israel and Iran are regional rivals, that Israel is the status quo power and Iran is the rising power, and therefore there may be a conflict between them in the future. In this scenario, the US would not want Iran to have nuclear parity with Israel so that Israel could fight to maintain its status quo power, well, status. The more hysterical line of thought is that Iran is irrational and will immediately destroy Israel once it acquires nuclear weapons. This line of thought has been cultivated by wrenching statements out of context or mistranslating them (I know Persian and can attest to this, as a Google search will as well), as well as being just a sort of normal thing to say when a state seems poised to gain nuclear weapons (this is the attitude the US Military had when China gained nuclear weapons; that China was irrational and would use them in a suicidal mission). This, however, can be a debate for another day, as I have already shown why the issue of Israel matters to the US in the event of an Iranian nuclear weapons acquisition without suggesting that Iran is irrational (they aren't).
4. Regime change. This is probably the least likely reason behind America's opposition, but if Iran gains nuclear weapons the US would have to give up the possibility of forced regime change. Again, this is very unlikely to be the motivation behind the US opposition, but it is a possibility.
Wiki User
∙ 12y agoLet's face it- there is no real reason why they can't. If the US can have nuclear weapons, anyone can because they are the only ones who have been irresponsible enough to use them.
Add your answer:
Earn +20 pts
Why is America apposed to Iran having nuclear weapons?
America is opposed to Iran having nuclear weapons because we see their country as unstable and if they were allowed to have nuclear weapon capability they would either use it against us or sell them to radical terrorist group. At least that's what we believe.
Does Afghanistan have nuclear weapons?
NO. Afghanistan does not have nuclear weapons, nor did it have nuclear weapons at any time, nor has it been accused by other countries of having nuclear weapons. Afghanistan is also a signatory to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, for what that's worth.
Does Afghanistan or pakistan have nuclear weapons?
NO for Afghanistan; YES for Pakistan. Afghanistan does not have nuclear weapons, nor did it have nuclear weapons at any time, nor has it been accused by other countries of having nuclear weapons. Afghanistan is also a signatory to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, for what that's worth.Pakistan confirmed its first nuclear weapons tests in 1998.
Which country needs uranium?
Countries having nuclear reactors and nuclear weapons but without important reserves of uranium.
Why are having nuclear weapons in Cuba so dangerous to the US?
because Cuba is within 90 miles of Miami and nuclear weapons can easily travel farther than that
Does the US nuclear weapons?
Does the U.S. have nuclear weapons? Yes there are five countries that obtained nuclear weapons in the aftermath of the Second World War: U.S., Great Britain, Russia, China, and France. These five signed the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty to stop the expand of nuclear weapons. In the '70s both India and Pakistan began acquiring nuclear capability. North Korea, Iran, and Israel are controversial countries that are unkown for having yet obtained, but having hinted, at control of nuclear capability. I say nobody should have them.
What is Australia's view on Iran's nuclear weapons?
Australia's view about Iran having nuclear , Australia does not support that because If Iran had their Nuclear weapons they will threat the world, and will cause an nuclear race in the Arab nations witch will lead to WW3
What 3 countries officially acknowledge having nuclear weapons?
USRussiaUKFranceChinaIndiaPakistanNorth Korea
Does Europe have the most nations with nuclear weapons?
Yes they do have the most countries with nuclear arms but it does not compare with the united sates of America having a enough atomic and nuclear weapons to blow up the planet at least ten times over. it's scary to even think about but it's a fact that we have to live with regardless i just wonder if the united sates will ever use those weapons against the rest of the world.
What country used nuclear weapons first?
The U.S. is first to have nuclear weapons, having nukes since 1945. The Soviet Union followed the U.S. by developing and testing their first nuke in 1949. Both nation started making hydrogen bombs (nukes using nuclear fission to explode) starting in the mid-1950s. Excuse me replying with a question, but were the Atomic bombs dropped on Japan in 1945 Nuclear weapons ? I am assuming they were, but do not know of the differentiation.
Why does Iran insist on having nuclear energy?
For many Iranians, having nuclear power is a symbol of being a part of the developed world. They see the world preventing them from having nuclear weapons as part of a larger act of Europeans and Americans to prevent Iran from rising to be a first world country. They also consider it to be a question of double standards when Israel, India, and Pakistan are allowed nuclear weapons and nuclear power, but Iran is allowed neither.
What are the criteria for having nuclear weapons?
As far as I know nuclear weapons have never been traded between countries, so if a country has nuclear weapons it is due to their own science and technology, or to espionage activities to get the required knowledge. The other criterion is not to have signed up to the Non Proliferation Treaty, except for countries that had already developed weapons when the Treaty came into being.
