| |
| Join Our Newsletter |
 Please Select sub-criteria |  |
|
|
|
|
| |
| Middle Eastern Proliferation: Reality or Myth? |
03 |
|
|
| |
| |
| |
In addition, the US has been apprehensive due to the possibility of the Saudi regime being removed by Islamists, leading to the establishment of a Caliphate. The possibility of a Caliphate emerging as a challenge to its hegemony is sufficient to worry the US; add nuclear capabilities and these fears increase. Therefore it is definitely in US national interests to thwart any Saudi attempts to develop nuclear weapons. US interests are a major constraint on Saudi ambitions, but nevertheless the US continues to be the guarantor of the Saudi regime’s security.
Syria
Relations between Iran and Syria have been on good terms since the 1970s. Mutual interests have characterised the relations between the two countries. Chief among these are the threats both countries have faced from Iraq, Turkey and Israel. In addition, today both countries are subject to criticism from the US and potential military attack in the future. In response to US threats, the two countries have strengthened their relations. In February 2005, the two countries announced that they had formed a military pact, a direct result of growing US dominance in the region and aggression towards both countries.
Given the good relations between Syria and Iran, it is unlikely that Syria would attempt to develop nuclear weapons due to Iran doing so; in fact a nuclear Iran would be in the interest of Syria. The prospect of friendly relations with a nuclear actor could strengthen the Syrian hand in relations with the US, Turkey and Israel. In addition, if one looks to the international pressure and scrutiny of the Assad regime following the Hariri assassination, it seems unlikely that Syria would consider developing nuclear weapons. The Assad regime at this moment in time is concerned with political survival. Pressure is growing from all sides, the continuing inquiry into Hariri’s assassination and a new Khaddam-Muslim Brotherhood alliance are adding to the difficulties facing the regime. External pressure could tempt the government to consider acquiring nuclear weapons, rather than the ‘threat’ of a nuclear Iran, but given the difficulties Syria faces at this moment in time, it is unlikely to make its situation more complicated and add further pressure on itself by seeking nuclear weapons.
Conclusion
The cases analysed above indicate that the fear of regional powers acquiring nuclear weapons in response to a nuclear Iran seems more myth rather than reality. A number of hurdles and obstacles face the countries discussed before they could even begin to contemplate acquiring nuclear weapons. US interests are the key factor behind the Middle Eastern proliferation story that is currently being touted. In order to build a case to argue against Iran developing nuclear weapons, justifications are required. The regional proliferation story works, but in reality this line does not stand scrutiny, it only hides true US interests. The US has been concerned by the prospect of a regional actor emerging in the Middle East that could potentially threaten its military dominance in the region. A nuclear Iran would undermine US dominance in the Middle East as it could no longer dictate but would have to consult and listen. In addition, the possibility of being driven out of the vitally important Persian Gulf by a nuclear Iran haunts the US, as it would be catastrophic to US interests. It is these interests that are driving US policy towards Iran rather than fear of instability in the region. If the US was concerned with instability in the Middle East it would have changed its decades-old policy of supporting Israeli aggression against Palestinians, and backing Arab dictators; the US would not have attacked Iraq nor instigated the War on Terror. This US policy has acted as a key source of de-stabilisation rather than stability in the Middle East. The key driving force behind US foreign policy continues to be national interests and it is these interests that are pushing the propaganda campaign to prevent the emergence of a nuclear Iran.
| |
| |
| |
| |
« First < 1 2 3
Page 3 of 3 pages
| |
|
|
