Nuclear proliferation in the Middle East: some realists forecast stability

The article is devoted to the realist view on the matter of proliferation in the Middle East and in particular the prospect of Iran becoming a nuclear power. The research confines itself to the assertion that nuclear Iran would bring stability to the region, and therefore is based on works of advocates of this argument, such as K. Waltz, S. Walt, J. Mearsheimer, R. Takeyh and others. This subject matter is pertinent in context of the on-going negotiations over Iran's Nuclear Program, and the realist analysis of this issue is interesting due to the fact that followers of this theory d irectly or indirectly take part in formulating foreign policy of the US - one of the protagonists of nowadays nuclear agenda. Shaping of realist view on Nuclear Weapons (NW) went gradually. At first realism considered nuclear forces only as a new sort of weaponry, but more powerful and destructive. Later on realists admitted the fatal character of the exchange of nuclear attacks and the inadmissibility of a nuclear war. And by the end of XXth century realism admitted stabilizing role of NW and many adherents of the theory called it "weapons of peace". The Middle East is a conflict region. One of the destabilizing factors is Israel and its lasting monopoly on nuclear force. The wish of Iran to acquire a nuclear bomb is a reaction to perceived encirclement by enemies: American troops in the Persian Gulf, Afghanistan, and Iraq represent constant threats to Iranian security, while a hostile Israel has already carried out with impunity preemptive strikes on supposedly nuclear sites in Iraq in 1981 and Syria in 2007. Moreover, economic sanctions and political pressure on Iran are more likely to provoke it to acquire the bomb than to prevent it. According to such realists as K. Waltz, S. Walt, J. Mearsheimer, R. Takeyh and some others, Nuclear Weapons is an ultimate guaranty of security as well as "weapons of peace". Therefore countries, being rational actors of international relations seeking survival, have to and will tend to acquire it. Albeit, possessing nuclear weapons doesn't endow a country with any hi gher status, but reduces external pressure and lowers the probability of war. Thereby, according to a group of realists, in case of Iran going nuclear, the Middle East might attain to stability.

Keywords

Authors

References