Nuclear deal with Iran will not spark nuclear proliferation in the Middle East
MYTH: The deal ensures that Iran will get a bomb, sparking nuclear proliferation across the Middle East.
The deal takes Iran off the path to a bomb and keeps all U.S. options on the table if Iran cheats. Without this deal, UN inspectors would be kicked out, and Iran would again be within weeks or months of a bomb, with all of its centrifuges spinning and its enriched-uranium stockpiles growing. Without the deal, Iran has enough uranium for ten bombs right now. With the deal, it will immediately have less than what it needs for one bomb. Under the deal, Iran also agrees to the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) Additional Protocol, so it is bound to not producing nuclear weapons. If it chooses to try, all the options available today—including military action—will be available to the U.S. president in five, ten, fifteen or even thirty years.
Quicktabs: Evidence
Arguments
-
Several states, notably Saudi Arabia, have been vocal in their opposition to the nuclear deal with Iran and have argued that they will seek to pursue a similar enrichment program to the one Iran is pursuing, raising the spectre of an 'enrichment arms race'. However, empirically, states have threatened to pursue nuclear programs in response to other states but the cause and effect dynamics are rarely that simple, with states pursuing weapons programs (or enrichment programs) for a number of different motivations.
Related Quotes:- Pragmatic concessions to nascent nuclear states have strengthened nonproliferation more than harmed it empirically
- Risk of setting a precedent by allowing Iranian enrichment is less than the alternative
- Absent an agreement, pressure for Arab countries to pursue enrichment would remain the same
- On balance, a nuclear deal with Iran would be a huge success for global nonproliferation efforts and the NPT regime
- ... and 20 more quote(s)
Parent Arguments:Counter Argument: