US attitudes and the Morality of Iranian Nuclear Activities

Iran is deliberately taunting the United States and other defenders of the status quo. But, those determining United States policies in the Middle East should note that Iranians are not illegally occupying and settling territory in defiance of UN resolutions. In the recent past Iran was invaded by Iraq. In contrast Israel invaded the Lebanon and inflicted disproportionate violence on GAZA . So why should Iran's possession of a nuclear potential be regarded as a uniquely dangerous threat? Undoubtedly Iranian possession of nuclear weapons would be inconvenient for all who are interested in Iran remaining relatively weak.

Potentially, Iran acquiring nuclear weapons would also initiate an arms race and destabilize a region important for western interests. Nevertheless, it is difficult to argue that Iran's possession would be uniquely immoral or more dangerous than Israel's has been. Nor in this case can it be argued that possession of nuclear weapons in the hands of a democracy confer any moral advantage.

There not much to choose between the morality of an apartheid regime and a religious oligarchy. As for wiping the map clean, what is the effect of Israel inflicting settlement,and other associated policies, on Palestinians in parts of East Jerusalem and the west Bank. The real threat to peace and stability in the region is Israel's illegal occupation policies and inflexibility, facilitated by American support and subsidies, and Arab reactions rather than Iranian nuclear activities.