Threshold to the Nuclear Century

I just read this article on the Independent which basically reports that countries with nuclear capabilities are condemning Iran for manufacturing enriched uranium, nothing we haven't heard before, however I would like to dedicate this topic in defence of Iran.



First of all, what do we know? We know that nuclear energy is clean, cheap and much more efficient than the more traditional fuels. This means that any country in the world that is progressing will get to a point where it will require to use nuclear energy as it is simply the next step. Without a source of energy no country can move forward, and while backward countries progress, they will reach a point that no progress can be achieved without a more efficient form of energy. When that point is reached, naturally, the country will be capable of building nuclear facilities to progress even further.

We also know that this nuclear capabilities comes with the ability to build nuclear weapons, and this is where the problem lies. The countries that already have nuclear capabilities (and their puppet regimes like Saudi Arabia) are using this very point to stop Iran from progressing any further. That and to create an excuse for an occupation.

First of all, knives are used to slice bread as well as to kill people. The use of nuclear energy is just a next time for every single country in the world. Stopping them from using it because there is a possibility they might use it for killing people is no different from banning knives. Nay, it is even more harmful to the people, because without that energy, nations are never going to progress. The demand for progress from the people in growing countries is going to bang at the gates of the West who are monopolising this energy and creating the barrier. Sooner or later someone is going to start manufacturing nuclear energy whether the West likes it or not. It is their god given right as human beings to work and better their lives. If nuclear energy is the answer to move forward, then no one can stop the nations of the world to use it at some point in the future when they are advanced enough. It is an inevetible consequence of nations progress.

As for the danger of the nuclear weapons, this will not go away by the West's method of intimidation and war. The inevetible nuclear future could not be stopped and the West's war on progress of other nations is a futile effort. If it is indeed the fear of nuclear war that the West is trying to prevent, then the answer is not tying the hands of people and locking them inside the cages of backwardness. To stop war you have create peace, and not force it. A dictator will force peace under his rule by making people too afraid to break the law. For the outsider, people are abiding by the law as if they were the ones that wrote it. However as soon as a chance will come, people will revolt and will eventually rip apart the tyrants. This is exactly what the West is doing, it is trying (or so it claims) to create peace by banning progress in Iran, threatening the country and calling for war against it. Giving Iran and her people the images of blood and chaos the US created in neighbouring Iraq. If Iran gives in (and I seriously doubt it will) it will only be temporarily. Iran and every other country will come calling for nuclear energy as it is only the natural progress of nations.

Banning nuclear energy to avoid a nuclear war is as good as banning sharp objects to avoid stabbings. In order to reduce murders in a country, education is used. People are made aware of the rights and wrongs. Differences are settled in a more civilised manner. In order to avoid nuclear war, differences should likewise be settled. Stopping progress will only make things worse.