Towards a Nuclear Middle East

Within a matter of months, Iran could be in possession of nuclear weapons. The evidence for this was considered last week here. This is a state perfectly content to finance, train and arm with conventional weapons terrorist groups in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iraq, Lebanon and Palestine. This is a state with political discourse dominated by nationalism.

These are the two major impacts from Iran’s decision: nuclear proliferation, and the possibility of terrorist organisations obtaining weapons of mass destruction. It is often easy to forget these consequences and simply focus on the prospect of the Ayatollah with his finger on the button, hoping that mutually assured destruction will save us.

The Evidence Against Iran

Debate intensifies over Iran and their nuclear weapon program. President Obama has set a deadline for negotiation, but seems no closer to resolving the diplomatic gridlock that has perpetuated for so long.

The Iranian regime obstinately refuses to compromise their quest for nuclear energy, and President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has the support of key political forces in this respect. He still denies that his state is seeking nuclear weapons. Should we believe him?

Time is Running Out

The New York Times reports on President Obama’s recent meeting with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel. The US has effectively announced the limits of their willingness to negotiate with Iran, and seeks negotiation by the end of the year.

As the Iranian election approaches, current policy with respect to the nation is clearly failing. The last US administration’s failure to engage with them on a sufficient timetable has left the incoming President with too few options. The situation is becoming grim.