Hypocrisy
in Disarmament Demands
Comparing Iran to South Africa and Libya is misleading.
South Africa dismantled its program during a peaceful transition from
apartheid, not under external pressure. Libya abandoned its efforts after the
US invaded Iraq in 2003 — a move that didn’t prevent Libya’s eventual collapse
under Western intervention. Iran, aware of this history, has little reason to
believe unilateral disarmament would ensure its security.
Iran, a signatory of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty
(NPT), allows International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) inspections. In
contrast, Israel, which possesses nuclear weapons, hasn’t signed the NPT or
permitted inspections — yet faces no calls to disarm. If non-proliferation were
truly the goal, the same standards would apply to all nations, not just US
adversaries.
Broken
Agreements and Misleading Narratives
Iran adhered to the 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action
(JCPOA), verified by the IAEA, until the United States unilaterally withdrew in
2018, reimposing sanctions. Iran continued compliance, hoping European nations
would uphold the deal, reducing commitments only after it became clear
sanctions would persist. The portrayal of Iran as the party breaking agreements
is a distortion of events.
Sanctions:
Economic Warfare, Not Diplomacy
Sanctions have hurt ordinary Iranians without forcing
government collapse or nuclear abandonment. Iran’s economy, despite hardships,
has adapted through domestic industries and alliances with China and Russia.
Economic warfare often fuels national resilience, not surrender.
Real
Source of Instability
The issue isn’t Iran’s nuclear program — it’s Western
intervention and support for authoritarian regimes to maintain US-Israeli
military dominance. Iran remains open to dialogue but not likely to accept
one-sided deals demanding surrender. True diplomacy requires mutual respect,
not coercion — the only path to a fair, lasting peace.
No comments:
Post a Comment