by Steve Lussing

Created on: October 24, 2008

The simplest argument in favor of the sovereign right of all nations to implement their own nuclear energy policies is that many countries are already enjoying this very right as we speak, therefore, why is this even an issue? No country which currently powers its own economy using nuclear technology is about to abandon it in order to support the case for the contrary.

The presumption that a country "might" use its nuclear technology to develop weapons of mass destruction is somewhat hypocritical in light of the fact that many of those countries which have nuclear technology have already developed those same weapons, for the purpose of deterrence. One of those countries once leveled two important cities in a nation it now considers an ally. It was not the only entity which learned from this devastation. And yet nuclear proliferation continued.

The U.S. is even now using its nuclear technology to manufacture depleted uranium ammunition. Bullets and other ordinance tipped with this alloy can penetrate the armor shielding of any vehicle or structure, giving U.S. forces a huge technological advantage over its enemy. In the meantime, it is demonstrative in its support of denying Iran the right to develop the same kind of technology.

It is patently unfair to deny certain nations the same rights already assumed by others. The argument could be made that it is a dangerous world that we live in, and that in denying a nation the same rights and privileges which other nations enjoy, makes for an even more dangerous world. That is a point to ponder.

There is a global energy crisis which demands attention. Nuclear power is clean and practical, versus carbon-based fuels. When, in the future, the poorer nations can no longer afford to pay a high price for carbon-based fuels then nuclear power becomes the only alternative. Every country has the inherent right to obtain and use technology to develop its own natural resources to power its own economy. This includes nuclear technology.

A clear case can be made that UN Security Council Resolution 1696, demanding that Iran give up its right to use nuclear technology, is not legally enforceable, and constitutes just so much rhetorical appeasement in support of the sentiments of a few nations who feel justifiably threatened by the possibilities which might manifest should Iran obtain the materials to manufacture a bomb. Nevertheless, national sovereignty and the inalienable rights which complement it must be respected.

There are alternative solutions. For one, Iran might be encouraged to seek Canadian nuclear reactor technology to provide electrical power to its people. The Canadian reactor is of a type which does not breed plutonium. If Iran is truly sincere in using its resources for peaceful purposes it would seriously consider buying into this technology instead of investing in a direction which clearly points toward a future of nuclear armament.

Learn more about this author, Steve Lussing.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.