Warum unterscheiden das Völkerrecht und die großen Weltmächte oft nicht zwischen „friedlicher“ und „sensibler“ nuklearer Hilfe, wenn es um den Iran geht, selbst wenn es sich bei der Technologie um nicht waffenfähigen Brennstoff handelt?
https://www.cfr.org/articles/ripple-effect-un-sanctions-irans-nuclear-program
7 Kommentare
Because the ayatollahs keep harping on about blowing up that Jewish nation.
Edit – the enrichment tech is essentially the same.
Because the Western hegemony wants that land.
In a word, plutonium.
if you can make fuel for a nuclear reactor, you can make material for a nuclear bomb. it just takes longer.
if you have a nuclear reactor, you can make material for a nuclear bomb. it just depends on the type of reactor how long that takes.
There is no such thing as non-weaponizable fuel production technology.
However, it is very doable to keep track of uranium. That was the point of the Iran deal. The US pulled out of that agreement because Trump is a Colossal Idiot.
Why are we being blind about Iran’s weaponization efforts?
The matter was done when the archive stolen showed Iran is deceiving the world.
It that isn’t enough, there are no civilian uses for 60% enriched Uranium.
If that isn’t enough, civilian use cases don’t need to be built in bomb-proof underground bunkers.
If that isn’t enough, Iran *literally* tells the world they have right to nuclear weapons and are going to pursue that right. The current conflict is because they refused to stop.
Why is this even a debate anymore?
Because the line isn’t reliable in practice. Peaceful nuclear tech is still dual use and when it’s paired with hardened facilities and hostile rhetoric countries react to worst case risk not stated intent. That’s why the distinction breaks down.
No one trusts Iran. I feel that’s, in the end, the root cause. And even when Iran manages to slowly build trust with most non-regional actors, it’s enough that Israel doesn’t trust it, and convinces the US that it is untrustworthy, and all their efforts fail.
Tbh that’s an inherent flaw of a theocratic regime with unrealistic, extremist, dogmatic policies basically written into its constitution. I struggle to see how Israel could ever rationally risk trusting the Islamic Republic. That is not to say I think any of what Israel and the US have been doing recently is rational or long-term useful for either of them either.