Essays on The ethics of international affairs: The discussion about nuclear weapons threat in the Middle East

Dr. El-Baradei thinks that it’s not typical for civilization to voluntarily refuse from its weapons. That is why it is so hard to convince the opposite sides to agree to participate in The Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons. (El-Baradei n.a.)

Secretary Chu’s remarks about Iran. Comment how the six principles identified in Coicaud and Warner relate and apply to this problem of international relations:

Sovereign equality of states
Self-determination of people
Prohibition on the threat or use of force
Peaceful settlement of disputes
Non-intervention in the internal affairs of other states
Respect for human rights

According to Secretary Chu’s comment Iran denies its nuclear reactor development, although it has non-proliferation of nuclear weapons obligations.

It’s hard to understand the real situation with Iran, because there are actually several opinions on this country. For instance, ElBaredei is claimed to have a mild attitude towards Iran in comparison to some representatives of Western countries like France or USA. He resisted the possibility of attack against Iran because of potential dangers of a nuclear weapon that owns this country. He compared the possible attack with Iraq’s situation and indicated that there are many civilian people who suffered because of the same suspicions over nuclear weapon.

It is known that in 2009 ElBaradei indicated that unfortunately “Iran has not implemented any of the measures called for by the Security Council and by the Agency’s Board of Governors.” But at the same time there is “a new initiative of the United States to engage the Islamic Republic of Iran in direct dialogue, without preconditions and on the basis of mutual respect”. (Cordesman 399)

What’s the most interesting is that the nuclear program in this country was actually launched in the middle of the 20th century with the support of the US and this partnership has continued till Iranian Revolution in 1979.

But after the revolution the government of this country has re-launched its nuclear program with the emphasis on research. Nowadays Iran is often blamed that its enrichment program is targeted for non-peaceful goals.

I think that it’s really important to suggest serious guarantees for Iran and the first steps have been made. The world’s most influential states that officially announced about their nuclear status (the US, Russia, France, Britain and China) have to take part as mediators in the negations between Iran, Israel and the IAEA. (Cordesman 400)

It’s vital for establishing a peacemaking process in this region to achieve the nuclear-free zone there, although we all understand that it is complicated.

Probable the best idea will be to use as mediators not only the Western countries, but also some Arab countries that Iran has established partner relations with.

World influential politics and special institution like the IAEA have to suggest a way to bring the Israel and Iran to the same table for negations dedicated to decreasing of nuclear weapons and in the future to the nuclear-free zone.

I would like to continue with comments on how the principles identified in Coicaud and Warner relate to the issue of nuclear threat in the Middle East region.

Sovereign equality of states

We should always remember that no matter of the territorial size, the population figures, wealth, power or other characteristics, all states are equal. They have equal right none of them should be discriminated.

“Since men are by nature equal, and their individual rights and obligations the same, as coming equally from nature, Nations, which are composed of men and may be regarded as so many free persons living together in a state of nature, are by nature equal and hold from nature the same obligations and the same rights.” (Preus 17)

It means that all of the states-participants in the nuclear negotiations should be treated as equal interdependent international identities and there should not be any preferential or special attitudes and no exclusions.

Self-determination of people

Under any condition, no matter what the matter is, the people of the certain country have right to determine the principles they country obey. If they choose their country to be a nuclear power, it should be respected, but in this case country should obligatory become a part of official organization and subject to assessment and control.

Prohibition on the threat or use of force

I need to mention that the force have been used for pressure and intervention and also for punishment many times in the world’s history. But the international relations develop, the consciousness has caused the limitations in appliance of the force towards other countries.

This principle means that any official organizations and countries that have an significant influence on the global politics do not have a right to threat the participants of the nuclear negotiations in the Middle East.

Prohibition on the threat or use of force is one of the basic principles of international relations. This is proved by many so far adopted documents, but also those which, for political reasons, cannot still be accepted by most of states. The top ranking among them is probably the declaration on rights and obligations of states. Article 8 of the draft declaration, adopted by the International Law Commission of the United Nations states that “the duty of each state shall be to settle all disputes with other states by peaceful means and in a manner so as not to endanger peace, international security and justice”. (Preus, 19)