 |
| Iran's President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad in one of the country's nuclear sites |
Do you remember March 2003 when United Kingdom's Prime Minister Tony Blair and United States' President George Bush formed a coalition to invade Iraq because they suspected the country had Weapons of Mass Destruction which would have consequently obliterate the world and all mankind, and not finding any because the country had none? Almost nine years on, there are talks of another suspicious programme which could harm every living thing.
Indeed we are talking about Iran and their nuclear project. It is a different programme, a different country, and Britain and United States have different leaders but the question is how are President Barack Obama and Prime Minister David Cameron going to deal with this madness? I call it madness because this saga is one of those news events which will possibly end in travesty, unless world leaders solve the nuclear programming in a diplomatic manner.
The situation in Iran is different compared to Iraq 2003. UK and US genuinely believed there was Weapons of Mass Destruction there and took radical action very quickly based on their assumptions. This time around, both West nations, among others are getting rather cautious over the Iranian programme - especially Israel who themselves have their own problems with Iran. They have been the only nation which has openly told the press they intend to invade Iran. They have launched a test-fire missile earlier this month which could potentially hit Iran. In addition, the Bid Ganeh plant just outside Tehran, Iran's capital was involved in an explosion where 17 revolutionary guards were killed. It is unknown of what caused the eruption, however if it was Israel who were involved and their missile mentioned earlier did hit Iranian grounds, more than likely President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad will respond using his military and war would break through.
Further developments have occurred this week regarding this ongoing news event. The bigger story happened yesterday when George Osborne, UK's Chancellor of the Exchequer announced that Britain are to halt any financial connections with Iran, calling Iran's nuclear programme as "a significant risk to the national interests of the UK and countries across the region". Hillary Clinton, Secretary of State in the US have also announced this for their banks. It's a bold decision and for some, people can argue this action is wise as if Iran did build nuclear weapons, then UK don't want to get involved which to me is understandable.
This nuclear programme in Iran isn't a new topic of discussion. In fact it has been a major talking point for a number of decades, even before the revolution in 1979 - their usage of nuclear for the homes in the nation has been a major talking point since they first used it in 1950 with the help of ironically, United States. World nuclear corporation International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), also part of the United Nations family, have visited different nuclear sites in Iran numerous amount of times and now with the story escalating, they have warned Iran their current resources could lead to a development of a potentially harmful weapon. Iran have responded today by boycotting a crucial two-day Middle East nuclear disarmament conference which has given the West little choice but to force more sanctions against them yesterday - an imposition which Iran dismissed this afternoon.
The current news coverage appears to be going against Iran's favour - the more they say "no" to any claim thrown against them, the more people will start to assume they may have weapons building behind scenes as they are in denial constantly. This situation is in my view, out of Iran's hands - they can disagree with the West and Israel all they want but if a decision is final, they will become powerless. One suggestion to countries concerned with the nuclear programme is to actually visit the sites and judge for themselves if Iran could be using nuclear irresponsibly.
It has already been suggested by IAEA head Yukiya Amano last week to bring a few of their representatives to Iran after the report the organisation published the week previous, perhaps the United States and Britain could do the same. Pressing sanctions cannot last forever and in a sense, neither can nuclear but this matter has to be resolved and meeting the ayatollahs in Iran won't be a bad idea either. It annoys me when delegates walk out during Ahmadinejad's speeches. Yes, what he says sometimes can be loads of nonsense, however walking out of conferences Iran can be bothered attending would only get him rebelling against the West even more. I'm not in full support of nuclear as an energy source as to me, it's not economical enough but as long as government's are using it responsibly, then I have no problems with countries using it - let's hope Iran are one of these countries.
Enjoyed reading this blog post, like "John Saleh Price blogging" on Facebook, follow me on Twitter @johnsalehprice or add me on Google+ (John Saleh Price).
Comments
Post a Comment