Laaltain

Nuclear Deterrence and the Iran Deal

23 جولائی، 2015

[block­quote style=“3”]The nuclear arms race is like two sworn ene­mies stand­ing waist deep in gaso­line, one with three match­es, the oth­er with five.”
– Carl Sagan[/blockquote]

July 14, 2015 marked a his­toric day for advo­cates of nuclear dis­ar­ma­ment and non-pro­lif­er­a­tion. The world reached an agree­ment with Iran which essen­tial­ly stops the coun­try from pur­su­ing the devel­op­ment of a nuclear bomb.

The deal is a cul­mi­na­tion of years of nego­ti­a­tions and has brought a decade-old impasse over the Iran­ian nuclear pro­gram to a prob­a­ble res­o­lu­tion. The deal is his­toric from the per­spec­tive that it under­lines the sig­nif­i­cance of glob­al norms for peace and nego­ti­a­tions in con­trast to con­tin­ued dead­lock and con­fronta­tion. The deal also con­veys to glob­al pow­ers the effi­ca­cy of diplo­ma­cy in find­ing com­mon grounds for achiev­ing geopo­lit­i­cal out­comes. The deal sig­ni­fies that con­flicts can reach mutu­al com­pro­mise.

The deal is his­toric from the per­spec­tive that it under­lines the sig­nif­i­cance of glob­al norms for peace and nego­ti­a­tions in con­trast to con­tin­ued dead­lock and con­fronta­tion.

When this deal is hailed as one of the most con­se­quen­tial diplo­mat­ic achieve­ments of Pres­i­dent Obama’s terms, it is no exag­ger­a­tion. This is pre­cise­ly because this deal con­sol­i­dates the abil­i­ty of the U.S. to bring world pow­ers to the table, sub­stan­ti­ates the role of the U.S. as the focal point in inter-nation­al arbi­tra­tion and is, in the longer time­frame, like­ly to strength­en the reli­a­bil­i­ty of U.S. secu­ri­ty guar­an­tees to its allies by reduc­ing the uncer­tain­ty in its pro­jec­tions of the Mid­dle East.
The agree­ment — which is the out­come of delib­er­a­tions between Chi­na, France, Ger­many, Rus­sia, the Unit­ed King­dom, the USA (five of which are among the world’s nine nuclear pow­ers), the Euro­pean Union and Iran – lim­its Iran’s ura­ni­um enrich­ment activ­i­ties, removes stock­pile of its low-enriched ura­ni­um by 98 per­cent, blocks its attempts to pro­duce fis­sile mate­ri­als, pre­vents Iran from pro­duc­ing weapons-grade plu­to­ni­um, brings down Iran’s installed cen­trifuges by two-thirds in num­ber and ensures com­pli­ance which will be ver­i­fi­able through an inspec­tion regime at the sites of stor­age, of cen­trifuge pro­duc­tion and of enrich­ment. While many inspec­tion pro­to­cols will be fol­lowed for 10 to 25 years, oth­ers will remain in place per­ma­nent­ly.

The take-home from the deal for Iran will be a lift­ing of the oil and eco­nom­ic sanc­tions, some of which have been imposed since the 1979 Iran­ian Hostage Cri­sis. The deal opens doors for glob­al invest­ment in the oil and nat­ur­al gas reserves of Iran, which rough­ly make up for 10 per­cent and 18 per­cent of world reserves, respec­tive­ly. For a coun­try which has shrunk its econ­o­my by 15 to 20 per­cent and has lost near­ly a mil­lion bar­rels a day of exportable oil since the revised sanc­tions of 2012, it only reflects prag­ma­tism to have agreed to a deal to bring down the sanc­tions which have pre­vent­ed its oil indus­try from ben­e­fit­ting from mod­ern tech­nol­o­gy and invest­ment. Most impor­tant­ly, this deal is Iran’s oppor­tu­ni­ty to estab­lish its com­mit­ment to the Nuclear Non-Pro­lif­er­a­tion Treaty (NPT) which it acced­ed to in 1967 and reduce its region­al and glob­al iso­la­tion.

The deal opens doors for glob­al invest­ment in the oil and nat­ur­al gas reserves of Iran, which rough­ly make up for 10 per­cent and 18 per­cent of world reserves, respec­tive­ly.

Iran’s capa­bil­i­ty to go nuclear poten­tial­ly sym­bol­ized an accel­er­at­ed region­al require­ment to acquire nuclear deter­rence at par. The world is already main­tain­ing a nuclear arse­nal at a col­lec­tive cost of $ 1 tril­lion per decade, near­ly $ 350 bil­lion of which is con­sti­tut­ed by the U.S. nuclear spend­ing.
With the enor­mous mon­e­tary stakes involved, it is under­stand­able that the sta­tus quo which thrives on the nuclear econ­o­my will con­tin­ue to resist calls for denu­cleariza­tion. How­ev­er, nuclear mus­cle which is built and main­tained at a heavy price of com­pro­mised spend­ing on human devel­op­ment and has tremen­dous­ly neg­a­tive social and eco­nom­ic exter­nal­i­ties, val­i­dates the demand for glob­al nuclear dis­ar­ma­ment. UN esti­mates put the world pop­u­la­tion to 8 bil­lion by 2024; the respon­si­bil­i­ty to sus­tain this pop­u­la­tion ren­ders nuclear adven­tur­ism too expen­sive to be afford­able in the Post-2015 sce­nario.
The con­cept of rel­a­tive nuclear deter­rence has an intrin­sic insta­bil­i­ty. With every new addi­tion to the exist­ing nuclear stock­pile, coun­tries – both nuclear and non-nuclear – expe­ri­ence greater lev­els of vul­ner­a­bil­i­ty and inse­cu­ri­ty. And this is what makes the Iran Nuclear Deal chiefly rel­e­vant because it makes a case for a re-eval­u­a­tion of mil­i­tary pri­or­i­ties in favor of the tan­gi­ble well-being of peo­ple.

Even­tu­al­ly, it is the well-being of peo­ple which is the most promi­nent guar­an­tee of glob­al secu­ri­ty.

 

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *