C. Rice is clearly saber rattling as she talkes about Iran and their nuclear research programs. The USA has 10,000 nuclear warheads, is actively engaging in modernizing its current weapons, and is proposing to spend $40 billion this year on nuclear development.
I don’t understand why other sovereign nations should not be premitted to do the same if they so choose. I understand that we don’t want Iran to develop nuclear weapons, but what legal authority does the United States or other countries in Europe have with regard to what another country decides to do within their own borders? Is this a matter of international law, or simply of raw power?
What ever happened to the idea nuclear disarmament?
Doug:
The basic priniciple of the neo-conservatives now running our foreign policy is that if you have power, you have a moral obligation to use it. Or put another way, might = right.
The passages below are from 1997 from my favorite neo-conservative web site. Note the sponsors at the bottom. They’re not shy about telling the world where they stand. Many of them have gone on to get good government jobs.
Also great beginner flute. Thanks
Mark
“As the 20th century draws to a close, the United States stands as the world’s preeminent power. Having led the West to victory in the Cold War, America faces an opportunity and a challenge: Does the United States have the vision to build upon the achievements of past decades? Does the United States have the resolve to shape a new century favorable to American principles and interests?”
…
"• we need to accept responsibility for America’s unique role in preserving and extending an international order friendly to our security, our prosperity, and our principles. "
The Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty obliges non-nuclear nations (who are signitories) to refrain from developing weapons, unless they give a six-month otice of withdrawal.
Iran is a member, and they are probably* in violation.
The thing is, the NNPT is an implicit bargain–unnuclear nations agree to refrain, and the nuclear nations agree to not use their superior nuclear and cnventional capacity to push them around. That’s not in the treaty, but it IS a part of the body of international law.
However, the US has demonstrably rejected that law and it’s making everyone, it’s allies included, nervous. Now that this bargain no longer holds, I expect most nations are quietly exploring what it would take to get some nuclear insurance–International law will plainly no longer gurarrantee them soveriegnty.
*I say probably, because we’re getting the info about this from the same folks who gave us the WMD hoax, and it might all be bullshit.