Nuclear Deterrence: The Only Language Understood by Treaty-Breaking Foes

What is being sold today in Western diplomatic corridors as guarantees is not a lasting pact, but a trap to curb Iran's formidable nuclear power.

According to Ambassador Arjan's report, Aghaz newspaper wrote: People's demand is to revise the nuclear doctrine. This was a summary of the speech of Hojjatul Islam Ali Akbari, the preacher of Friday prayer in Tehran, from the platform of religious-political Friday prayer. When the necessity of changing the nuclear doctrine is mentioned in the most important platform of the government, i.e. the Friday prayer of Umm al-Qara of Islamic Iran, it means that the determination of the government for this change and transformation is decisive and dogmatic. According to the fatwa issued by Imam Shahid, any application and use of nuclear weapons had the Shariah sanctity. On this basis, Islamic Iran did not go towards building nuclear weapons either. It should be noted here that our martyred imam did not consider the manufacture of atomic weapons to be haram, but to use it as haram. Therefore, due to the use of deterrence that only having nuclear weapons has, many patriotic and committed personalities believe that it is necessary to go towards the construction of nuclear weapons and revise the nuclear doctrine. This is felt more than ever considering that we were invaded twice by two nuclear powers in less than a year.

It should be noted that simply having nuclear weapons brings deterrence; History is proof of this statement; In 1946, Mao's revolution came to fruition in China; America did not recognize this revolution and considered Taiwan to be the representative of China in the United Nations. In the 1950s, when the two Korean war started, America intervened in this war, and during this intervention, it was interested in occupying China; But an incident caused America to stop enmity with China; That event was nothing but the nuclearization of China as a result of Mao's insistence and steadfastness; China became a nuclear power in the 60s; Therefore, Henry Kissinger, the mastermind of the American governing body, went to Beijing and asked the leaders of the Chinese Communist Party for peace. Kissinger himself later wrote in his book that we couldn't get away with nuclear war.

But why go far, it was just last week that Donald Trump, the warmongering and terrorist president of the United States, said that I should like Kim Jong Un, the leader of North Korea; Because Pyongyang has 112 atomic bombs. Yes, when you have an atomic bomb, the biggest international murderer, Trump, will be humble and humble before you. This is the custom of the world of politics and what we call realpolitik; However, some people inside are still involved in political sentimentalism and think that they can face the international wolves with smile diplomacy. false imagination! The fact is that the atomic bomb, which is the pinnacle of deterrence, should not be confused with anything else; Trusting the evil international institutions in the name of America and the West, in this nuclear valley, is a strategic and fatal error that we were caught in during the JCPOA. This mistake should not be made any more.

In the world, the law of the jungle rules

What is being sold today in the corridors of Western diplomacy as a guarantee is not a lasting pact, but a trap to contain Iran's powerful nuclear power. Relying on unwritten commitments or loosely based agreements with a regime whose policy alphabet is the law of the jungle is not only not realistic, but also a kind of strategic simplistic which will only result in the psychological and military disarmament of a nation. In the cruel world of international politics, no institution gives security to anyone for free; Security is a commodity that can only be obtained by producing credible deterrence, not by smiling and signing papers that turn into ink on paper at the first crisis.

In the dictionary of international politics, security is not an imported commodity that can be provided from the basket of political optimism; Security is the end product of symmetric and asymmetric deterrence. As the enemy deploys its war machine behind our borders and blithely talks about options on the table and re-aggression, the constant call for unilateral restraint only increases the arrogance of the other side to cross our identity red lines. We have to accept that the balance of power in the modern world does not change with diplomatic compliments, but with a change in the coordinates of power, it is difficult to upset the enemy's calculations.

The revision of the nuclear doctrine is not a retreat from principles, but an intelligent response to existential threats. We live in a world where the legitimacy of a system is defined in its ability to survive independently, not in abstract international charters. The atomic weapon, in the hands of the Islamic system, is not a tool of invasion and conquest, which is a shield of civilization to protect the national honor against the attack of global predatory wolves; The tool that prevents evil in the hand of a believer and in the hand of a tyrant, the source of our destruction and our essential difference from them, lies in this same intention and rational guidance. The time has come for the diplomatic front of the country to free itself from the shackles of liberal sentimentalism and, with a correct understanding of the logic of power in the current chaotic world, instead of relying on the empty promises of the dominant powers, rely on internal power and nuclear deterrent power. Dignity depends on power, and power, in the current world, crystallizes only in the language of atoms. Those who still talk about the good taste of imaginary agreements of the last decade should know that the era of strategic optimism is over and today is the season of strategic awakening.

The doctrine of the Islamic Republic of Iran is currently based on not moving towards building an atomic bomb; Of course, this doctrine is not an unchangeable issue and changes may be made based on the country's security needs. According to Islamic principles, it is not permissible to build and use nuclear weapons and mass murder, but if it is necessary to build such a weapon to protect the lives, property, and honor of Muslims and the people of Iran, the Islamic Republic of Iran will definitely review the process of developing its nuclear industry and take the necessary measures! It should be noted here that the religious fatwa of Imam Shahid is based on the sanctity of using atomic weapons and this sanctity does not control the production of these weapons in case of vital needs of Islamic Iran. Moreover, Imam Shahid, in his statements to the gathering of pilgrims and residents of Motahar Razavi shrine on the first day of 2006, officially announced: Iran has acted according to international regulations to acquire nuclear knowledge, but if they are going to use the tools of the Security Council to create lawlessness and ignore the inalienable right of the Iranian nation, we can and will do lawlessness.

Neo-realism is the title of a theory in the science of international relations that refers to guaranteeing international peace through the acquisition of nuclear weapons by countries; This means that equipping countries' arsenals with nuclear weapons increases the level of mutual deterrence in the world and between countries, and in this way international peace and security is guaranteed. About a decade ago, Kenneth Waltz, a structuralist realist, in a debate, called Iran's attempt to obtain nuclear weapons natural and predicted that if Tehran is convinced that it wants nuclear weapons, it will be more destabilizing to remain non-nuclear. Waltz believed that Iran's nuclearization may be postponed for a while with diplomacy or sanctions, and it is also possible that Iran will settle for Astana's capacity for a while, like Japan, but he emphasized that Tehran's leaders may come to the conclusion that Iran's security cannot be provided without nuclear weapons.