The Iranian Nuclear Dilemma

Jonathan Metcalfe International Relations Research Paper Nathan Jones University of San Diego 5 December 2011 Since 2006 Iran has been making a serious push to gain nuclear weapons. Iran has been disregarding President Obama’s requests to cease the nuclear weapons program that is becoming a larger threat to international security. A realist would see the Iranian nuclear struggle as a push to challenge the power of the United States. Countries that have nuclear weapons legally through the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty are major world powers in regards to economic, military, and global influence. Realism suggests that if Iran were to obtain nuclear weapons that they could create hegemonic stability in the Middle East. Throughout history the Middle East has been a very unstable area. In recent years there has been effort to overthrow the dictatorial governments in the area, which created political unrest. Iran’s push to obtain nuclear technology could possibly bring peace to that area. Iran’s nuclear program has been developing since the 1960’s and was recently revived in 2006. Iran plans to have the nuclear technology ready by 2015. Iran could become a global superpower in years to come. Venezuela, Russia, the AQ Kahn network, and several other countries contribute to the Iranian development of nuclear weapons. These countries have aligned, and exchange information about WMD’s. Although aligning with these countries is an act of liberalism, Iran is merely using those countries to obtain the data necessary to create nuclear weapons. The realist predicts that Iran, when ready, will turn on these countries and utilize self-help strategies to satisfy the nation’s needs. Iran has the right to develop nuclear weapons to provide security. With nuclear weapons Iran would be able to deter other countries, such as the U.S. from invading. For example, Iraq was believed to have nuclear weapons in the years following September 11. When the U.S. invaded Iraq no weapons were found. However in North Korea, a country confirmed to have nuclear weapons, the U.S. will not invade, because it fears North Korea will retaliate. Iran logically should get nuclear weapons to prevent invasion into their country. The domestic level of analysis is valid in this circumstance because the ruling clergy, the military, and Ahmadinejad all have a say in the countries policies. Realism best describes the Iranian nuclear dilemma; realism predicts the growth of Iran and their ability to make their own choices, grow, make relations with whomever they choose, and provide themselves with national security. I plan to discuss the issue with on a domestic level of analysis. Iran and Venezuala Ahmadinejad suggest the age of Western domination is approaching its end.
Both Chavez and Ahmadinejad support the decline of the United States. These countries are working together to develop nuclear programs of their own. Russia has provided insights and supplies to these leader’s countries regarding how to build nuclear weapons. The United States sees this build up of arms as a threat to its own security. The realist would predict a conflict down the road between the United States and Iran, because the United States does not want to lose its state of hegemony. Realism suggests that if Iran can develop a legitimate nuclear program it can challenge the United States for global hegemony. Nuclear technology enables a country to have significant power without having a large number of troops. The cooperation between Chavez and Ahmadinejad is best described through realism because both individuals are striving to expand their nation’s power. The alliances they have made could be seen as liberalist actions; however, I feel the new alliances are better portrayed by realism because these countries are seeking to gain power. Iran and Venezuela are also major suppliers of oil to the world; if these countries were to gain more power, Chavez and Ahmadinejad could control the worlds oil market and make prices unfair for other nations, demonstrating the fungibility of Iran and Venezuala’s economic power. Ahmadinejad, the Iranian military, and the religious leaders of Iran are the driving forces behind much of Iranian politics.
Security Dilemma
According to Scott Sagan in his journal article “Why Do States Build Nuclear
Weapons?” states arm themselves to provide national security and power. States also use nuclear weapons as a way to influence other nations and to gain more power on the international stage, known as deterrence strategies. A country with nuclear weapons is more powerful politically and militarily than states without nuclear weapons. For example, the United States has tremendous influence in the western hemisphere, and the world, because nearly every country is discouraged from challenging the United States, due to its supply of nuclear weapons. Iran is determined to gain more power to challenge the hegemonic stability of the United States. Iranian elites feel that they have a duty to destroy the period of western domination. Realist theory suggests Iran would threaten other countries in the area, if Iran developed nuclear weapons. Therefore, by Iran arming themselves with WMD’s many other countries in the region might feel compelled to develop nuclear programs of their own, illustrating the security dilemma. If Iran did spark a sudden increase in nuclear weapons in the Middle East, a multipolar world could be created. Multipolar systems have been known to be uniquely unstable, and therefore could result in a global nuclear war.
Israel
However, another possibility is if Iran did obtain WMD’s that they would become the nuclear hegemon in the Middle East. The closest country that is confirmed by the NPT to have nuclear weapons is Pakistan. Pakistan created its nuclear program in response to India’s development of nuclear technology. However, Israel, a United States ally, is suspected of possessing nuclear weapons. Israel did not sign the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty; therefore, Israel is permitted to create its own nuclear program without the consent of other nations. Iran and Israel’s conflict has been long lasting and neither country plans on resolving the issue soon. Because of Iran’s growing nuclear program, Israel is becoming increasingly worried that Iran will use its new nuclear weapons to destroy Israel. Israel has plans to invade an Iranian nuclear facility and sabotage the equipment. However, this is a risky and difficult plan for Israel to complete. Israel would need the help of Iraq and the United States in order to successfully complete the mission. Israel would require U.S. help refueling their aircraft and permission from the United States allowing Israel the right to fly over Iraq. Although Iraq and Israel are not on the best terms, Iraq maybe inclined to help Israel to provide itself with national security. The United States and Iraq may work with Israel shortly in order to prevent Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons. A realist would suggest that Iran should become more powerful than both of those countries to become a hegemon.
Realism & Liberalism The liberalist approach has some validity as well, however does not thoroughly analyze the issue. Some communication does occur between Iran and the United States, however, it is typically not effective. For example President George W. Bush and President Barack Obama tried to negotiate with the Iranians to cut down the nuclear program that is developing in Tehran. This attempt failed; the Iranians shipped uranium out of the country to be enriched for the production of nuclear weapons shortly after the attempted negotiations. This suggest that it is difficult to negotiate with the Iranians; simply because they are not willing to negotiate with the United States. Therefore, supporting the realist perspective, because Iranian leaders are more concerned with power than achieving diplomacy. The leaders of each sovereign state will have a different intent on how to use nuclear power. Liberalist organizations such as the NPT are important, because the realist suggest the build up of nuclear weapons in a quest to dominate. However, this idea is impractical and dangerous in this situation. There need to be rules and restrictions on nuclear weapons due to their immense power. Russia, a country that has nuclear weapons legally through the NPT, is a major supporter of the Iranian and Venezuelan nuclear programs. Russia and the AQ Kahn network are known suppliers of nuclear technology to Iran and Venezuela. Russia was able to develop nuclear weapons shortly after World War II and challenge the United States for the position of global hegemon for nearly forty years, in the Cold War. Russia and the United States appear to be on good terms after the Cold War; however, Russia has made some backdoor alliances and deals that the United States does not support. The realist would expect the Iranians to make alliances with Venezuela and Russia. These three countries do not support the United States’ values, power, and intervention in global affairs. In this situation Russia, Venezuela, and Iran appear to be acting cooperatively as one realist nation. These countries are looking to challenge the power of the hegemon and insert themselves amongst global superpowers.
Identity & Realist Perspectives
The leaders of Iran and their nuclear allies have set aside ethnic differences in order to bandwagon against the United States. Realism trumps the identity perspective in this instance because Russia, Venezuela, and Iran have set aside national identities in order to align against the United States. Venezuela is an ideal nuclear launch site for Russia and Iran because of the proximity to the United States. The identity perspective could be used to analyze this issue; however, there are some flaws in this perspective. One could argue that because Iran’s mission is to obtain nuclear weapons, they are searching for a national identity. This statement is true to some degree; however, the realist argument is much stronger. Iran is trying to obtain nuclear weapons for their security in a world of international anarchy. Nuclear weapons are a way for them to provide security from other states.
The identity perspective also can be used to argue that the Iranians on a domestic level of analysis are challenging the beliefs and values of the Western world. In recent years, the Arab world has been associated with terrorist attacks, most notably 9/11. Although 9/11 did not occur because of Iranian leaders, there is a possibility that some Al Qaeda members could be taking refuge in Iran and possibly supplying Iranian elites with information and supplies necessary to produce nuclear weapons. This network of terrorist disproves of western culture, and Iranian leaders want to cooperate with other nations such as Venezuela and Russia to challenge the United States for hegemony. A realist would predict the Iranians would challenge any hegemon, not solely based upon western culture. For example, Iran would challenge China for power if the Chinese were able to surpass the United States in power. In fact if the Chinese were able to surpass the United States economically and become the global superpower, they could face the same dilemma as the United States, because China also has nuclear weapons. Realism suggest that the mindset of the leaders of Iran are not concerned with who they are fighting, but to fight to become a global power.
Realism
Realism proposes several reasons as to why Iran might arm itself with nuclear technology. According to the Center for Strategic and International Studies, the Middle East is becoming a region where many states are trying to arm themselves with WMD’s. Also in that region, not only are states engaging in an arms race, but also non-governmental groups such as Al Qaeda are striving to gain WMD’s. Through the realist perspective Iran should arm itself to try to become a regional power. If Iran were able to achieve nuclear weapons it could become the regional superpower that it once was under the Shaw. The Center for Strategic and International Studies also claims that domestic level of analysis is supported because Iran would want to eliminate Israel based on ingrained conflict. If Iran were to engage in nuclear warfare against Israel the United States, Israel’s ally, would be forced to intervene which could result in nuclear warfare.
Iran has so many possible connections that could provide them information and supplies in order to create their own nuclear program. These countries are not only Venezuela and Russia, but also include countries such as China, North Korea, India, and Pakistan. It seems as if it is nearly inevitable that Iran will have nuclear weapons in the near future. Iran feels as though the world looks down upon the Iranian nuclear program because of its association and proximity to terrorism. However, the Iranians are not discouraged by the disapproval of the world; they are still pushing to propel Iran to become a superpower. Iran’s nuclear program has been growing rapidly in recent years. According to the book Iran Threat Alireza Jafarzadeh stresses three major reasons as to why Iran’s nuclear program has grown: the take over of the nuclear program by the Iranian military, the transfer of Iran’s nuclear technology to a series of underground tunnels, and the president Ahmadinejad. Because the nuclear technology department has been taken over by the military, many countries are growing increasingly worried that they will use the bomb in an act of war. If Iran were to develop a nuclear bomb, the realist would see that as a step towards challenging the United States as a global hegemon. This worries the United States not only because they may lose their position of global hegemon, but also because they are worried that Iran would use the bomb against them. If Iran were to use the bomb on the United States, realist would predict that the United States would retaliate against the Iranian government, which could result in nuclear warfare.
Because the nuclear program has been shifted to a series of underground tunnels Iran’s nuclear program is unable to be under surveillance by countries such as the United States. Now, the United States is unable to know the progress Iran has made in the development of the bomb. It has become nearly impossible for the United States or the United Nations to stop Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons. The underground development of nuclear weapons places Iran in a growing position of power. The strategy of moving their weapon production underground not only shields it from the eyes of other countries but also protects the weapons from attacks.
Iran’s different levels of government have been crucial in developing the nuclear program in Iran. Iran is working to develop nuclear technologies that could propel them to becoming a regional superpower and global hegemon. The Iranian government, military, religious leaders, and president have had tremendous influence, which supports the domestic level of analysis. The realist predicts that Iran should challenge the United States in order to obtain more power. Iran has made efforts to obtain nuclear weapons, and the realist predicts that they will continue to make progress towards achieving nuclear weapons, and possibly bring hegemonic stability to the Middle East. Realism on a domestic level of analysis best describes Iran’s nuclear struggles because Iran is merely searching to achieve more power in the global anarchy.

Bibliography
Alireza Jafarzadeh. “The Iran Threat: President ... - Alireza Jafarzadeh - Google Books”, n.d. http://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=jnW33nwDvsUC&oi=fnd&pg=PR7&dq=iran+ahmadinejad&ots=T16ejTpLNh&sig=Uw8_7doquCWMaUXMx5ER-oAe6xQ#v=onepage&q&f=false.
“BBC News - Iran and Venezuela deepen ‘strategic alliance’”, October 20, 2010. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-latin-america-11593197.
“BBC News - Iran and Venezuela deepen ‘strategic alliance’”, n.d. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-latin-america-11593197.
Cordesman, Anthony H., and Khalid R. Al-Rodhan. “Iranian Nuclear Weapons?” Center for Strategic and International Studies, February 21, 2006.
David Sanger. “U.S. Rejected Aid for Israeli Raid on Iranian Nuclear Site - NYTimes.com”, January 10, 2009. http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/11/washington/11iran.html?pagewanted=all.
“Iran’s Nuclear Program - News - The New York Times”, October 17, 2011. http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/international/countriesandterritories/iran/nuclear_program/index.html.
“Iran’s Nuclear Program - News - The New York Times”, n.d. http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/international/countriesandterritories/iran/nuclear_program/index.html.
Ruth Wedgwood. “Al Qaeda, Terrorism, and Military Commissions”, n.d. http://www.jstor.org/stable/2693927?seq=2%20al.
Scott D. Sagan. “Why Do States Build Nuclear Weapons?”, n.d. http://www.jstor.org/stable/2539273?seq=2&.
Shultz, George P., Sam Nunn, William J. Perry, and Henry A. Kissinger. “A WORLD FREE OF NUCLEAR WEAPONS”. The Wall Street Journal, January 4, 2007.

--------------------------------------------
[ 1 ]. Scott D. Sagan, “Why Do States Build Nuclear Weapons?”, n.d., http://www.jstor.org/stable/2539273?seq=2&.
[ 2 ]. “Iran’s Nuclear Program - News - The New York Times”, October 17, 2011, http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/international/countriesandterritories/iran/nuclear_program/index.html.
[ 3 ]. “BBC News - Iran and Venezuela deepen ‘strategic alliance’”, October 20, 2010, http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-latin-america-11593197.
[ 4 ]. “Iran’s Nuclear Program - News - The New York Times.”
[ 5 ]. “Iran’s Nuclear Program - News - The New York Times”, n.d., http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/international/countriesandterritories/iran/nuclear_program/index.html.
[ 6 ]. Ruth Wedgwood, “Al Qaeda, Terrorism, and Military Commissions”, n.d., http://www.jstor.org/stable/2693927?seq=2%20al.
[ 7 ]. “BBC News - Iran and Venezuela deepen ‘strategic alliance’”, n.d., http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-latin-america-11593197.
[ 8 ]. “BBC News - Iran and Venezuela deepen ‘strategic alliance’.”
[ 9 ]. “BBC News - Iran and Venezuela deepen ‘strategic alliance’.”
[ 10 ]. Anthony H. Cordesman and Khalid R. Al-Rodhan, “Iranian Nuclear Weapons?” (Center for Strategic and International Studies, February 21, 2006).
[ 11 ]. Ibid.
[ 12 ]. Scott D. Sagan, “Why Do States Build Nuclear Weapons?”.
[ 13 ]. “BBC News - Iran and Venezuela deepen ‘strategic alliance’.”
[ 14 ]. Ibid.
[ 15 ]. Alireza Jafarzadeh, “The Iran Threat: President ... - Alireza Jafarzadeh - Google Books”, n.d., http://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=jnW33nwDvsUC&oi=fnd&pg=PR7&dq=iran+ahmadinejad&ots=T16ejTpLNh&sig=Uw8_7doquCWMaUXMx5ER-oAe6xQ#v=onepage&q&f=false.
[ 16 ]. Scott D. Sagan, “Why Do States Build Nuclear Weapons?”.
[ 17 ]. Ibid.
[ 18 ]. “BBC News - Iran and Venezuela deepen ‘strategic alliance’.”
[ 19 ]. Scott D. Sagan, “Why Do States Build Nuclear Weapons?”.
[ 20 ]. Ibid.
[ 21 ]. David Sanger, “U.S. Rejected Aid for Israeli Raid on Iranian Nuclear Site - NYTimes.com”, January 10, 2009, http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/11/washington/11iran.html?pagewanted=all.
[ 22 ]. Ibid.
[ 23 ]. Ibid.
[ 24 ]. “Iran’s Nuclear Program - News - The New York Times.”
[ 25 ]. Ibid.
[ 26 ]. Scott D. Sagan, “Why Do States Build Nuclear Weapons?”.
[ 27 ]. George P. Shultz et al., “A WORLD FREE OF NUCLEAR WEAPONS” (The Wall Street Journal, January 4, 2007).
[ 28 ]. Cordesman and Al-Rodhan, “Iranian Nuclear Weapons?”.
[ 29 ]. “BBC News - Iran and Venezuela deepen ‘strategic alliance’.”
[ 30 ]. Ibid.
[ 31 ]. Cordesman and Al-Rodhan, “Iranian Nuclear Weapons?”.
[ 32 ]. Scott D. Sagan, “Why Do States Build Nuclear Weapons?”.
[ 33 ]. Ruth Wedgwood, “Al Qaeda, Terrorism, and Military Commissions.”
[ 34 ]. Scott D. Sagan, “Why Do States Build Nuclear Weapons?”.
[ 35 ]. Cordesman and Al-Rodhan, “Iranian Nuclear Weapons?”.
[ 36 ]. Ibid.
[ 37 ]. Ibid.
[ 38 ]. Ibid.
[ 39 ]. Ibid.
[ 40 ]. Alireza Jafarzadeh, “The Iran Threat: President ... - Alireza Jafarzadeh - Google Books.”
[ 41 ]. Shultz et al., “A WORLD FREE OF NUCLEAR WEAPONS.”
[ 42 ]. Alireza Jafarzadeh, “The Iran Threat: President ... - Alireza Jafarzadeh - Google Books.”