Wednesday, September 06, 2006
The Nuclear Question
With conflict in the Middle East being constantly portrayed in the headlines it serves to reflect on the causes of US tension with Arab countries. The dialogue between the "Western" and "Eastern" cultures has been characterized by misunderstanding. Today, in the Wall Street Journal it was reported that US objection to the enrichment of Uranium by Iran was based on a danger that Iran could supply terrorists with weapons in the future. It seems worthy to note, the US government has supplied weapons to our own enemies multiple times. In Afghanistan, the US infamously supplied the Taliban with weapons and training. Afghanistan continues to be a region of conflict today. In Vietnam, the US often left weapon stockpiles in the jungles that were then used by the Viet Cong against American soldiers. In any case, the US has provided weapons that fuel terrorism even if unintentionally. I do not mean to suggest that I am at ease with the proliferation of nuclear weapons. Yet, there is reason to closely look at the reasoning behind government actions. In theory, nuclear proliferation can stabilize international relations as diplomatic interactions are needed to prevent mutually assured destruction. On the other hand, the more nuclear weapons that exist the greater the chance for misperception to lead to a costly mistake and human tragedy. In short, I hope that the US would talk to Iran rather than escalate the conflict with threats. The U.N. seems to have made some progress in it's talks with Iran, which is cause for optimism that violence can be avoided. Iran adamantly defends their right to pursue nuclear technology as a sovereign nation, a right the US enjoys and employs. I believe the will of the people represented by these governments is to live in peace with one another. We, as the people can always work to overcome the obstacles of misperceive with honest reflection on the many aspects involved in these complex issues. Any thoughts?