Debate should iran have nuclear weapons

Overview[ edit ] In Septemberthe IAEA Board of Governors, in a rare non-consensus decision with 12 abstentions, [42] recalled a previous Iranian "policy of concealment" regarding its enrichment program [43] and found that Iran had violated its NPT Safeguards Agreement. Iran's representative to the UN argued that the sanctions compelled Iran to abandon its rights under the NPT to peaceful nuclear technology. His irresponsible attitude of sticking his head in the sand over Iran's nuclear programme should lead to his impeachment.

The agreement, however, is not sealed just yet; it must pass through the US Congress, although President Obama has pledged that he will use presidential veto powers to overturn any attempts to block the deal. Nuclear weapons are primarily governed by the NPT.

The NPT came into force in At the time, there were five nuclear world powers, which were the five permanent members of the UN Security Council: The first three nuclear powers were those states permitted under the terms of the treaty to possess nuclear weapons. China, at the time, did not sign up to the NPT, arguing that it was discriminatory.

France also did not sign at first, but stated that it would behave as if it had signed.

All the people worldwide have the same rights and are equal to one another.

Both China and France eventually signed in Today, these remain the five states that are officially permitted to have nuclear weapons under the terms of the treaty.

It is widely thought that North Korea has some nuclear capability, but its nuclear capabilities are not supported. Firstly, that the five official nuclear powers agree not to transfer nuclear weapons or technology to other states.

Secondly, that states have a right to develop nuclear energy. And finally, a pledge to work towards full nuclear disarmament. This point is entirely correct and needs restating today in the context of the brutal and unjust sanctions that have been imposed on Iran.

There is nothing intrinsically moral or right about the limitation of nuclear weapons to these five states. Indeed, the NPT reflects the broader postwar international order, as governed by the UN Security Council, that sets up powerful nations to police the affairs of others.

However, even in its own terms, the NPT has lost any moral authority it might have had; it has been revealed to be nothing more than a nakedly political treaty in which the great powers designate who has rights and who does not.

Indeed, the existing nuclear powers have entirely neglected their end of the bargain, which is to work towards disarmament. Moreover, and just as importantly, the five official nuclear powers have openly breached the first and perhaps primary aim of the NPT — to limit nuclear proliferation.

India and Pakistan are openly nuclear states. Of course, they are not signatories to the NPT, but these two states have developed their nuclear arsenals with the full support of the official nuclear powers.

Iran and weapons of mass destruction - Wikipedia

Israel has not declared that it has nuclear weapons, but it is well known that it does. This, too, has happened with the full support of the official nuclear powers. The Iranian people have had what amounts to collective punishment imposed upon them, while India, Pakistan and Israel have received the blessing of the UN Security Council.

There is nothing moral or just about this situation. There is no justification for limiting nuclear weapons to the five states that managed to get them first, nor, given the non-compliance of the official five to the key parts of the NPT, can it be claimed anymore that this treaty retains any legitimacy.

Tara McCormack is a lecturer in international politics at the University of Leicester. She is author of Critique, Security and Power: Buy this book from Amazon UK. Make sure you read these Tim Black.Eliminate All Nuclear Weapons Please cast your vote after you've read the arguments.

You can also add to the debate by leaving a comment at the end of the page.

Big Issues

In addition to this, Iran have stated that they don't think that nuclear weapons would be beneficial to Iran (4), pointing out that Iran is content with or afraid of all its neighbors, as well as the fact that they have called for a Nuclear Weapon Free Zone in the Middle East several times (in , and ).

Debate: Should Iran Have Nuclear Weapons Essay Eliminating Iran’s Nuclear Power It’s quite astonishing how the United States conducts itself throughout the world. Consistently through history, the United States has made a point to go in and fight wars not . Iran is no threat to the United States they don't have a strong enough air force or a navy capable of attacking the United States te only country that would be in danger would be the State of Israel such is speculated to have at lest nuclear weapons.

• All countries should have the right to pursue a nuclear defence - DebateWise
• All nuclear weapons are good for is killing.

Nuclear weapons should be abolished simply because they are no longer the threat that they used to be at the time of their inception - nearly every country in the world either possesses a nuclear weapon or is the close ally of a nation that does. The recent Iranian nuclear deal is a historic agreement that could significantly delay, and perhaps prevent, Iran from getting nuclear weapons.