The fact that Iran has pursued nuclear energy for the past several years is not news. Neither is the United States position on this issue. While this issue has been discussed at length from one view point, that of the American government, I do not believe that it has been dealt with in any objective manner. I am going to attempt to address the issue of Iran's nucluear programme from a slightly different perspective.
That Iran is pursuing a programme designed to give it nuclear energy is
not in dispute. Iran's nuclear energy programme goes back to the 1970s when the United States backed the Shah's efforts to make nuclear energy a staple source of energy for a quickly developing Iran. The United States trained Iranian nuclear scientists, helped the Iranians purchase the parts of necessary to build their first nuclear power station, and supported the Iranians in their quest to procure alternate sources of energy. Despite the Americans seemingly supporting the Shah's government, the Nixon, Ford, and Carter administrations all sought to limit the possibility of nuclear proliferation and maintain American hegemony by imposing severe restrictions on how the Shah's government could use its newly aquired technology.
Not surprisingly, the Shah's government did not like the the restrictions imposed upon it. Equally not suprisingly, the American government did sanction nor support the continuation of the Iranian nuclear programme under the Islamic Revolution. However the programme was eventually continued. Thus, the current controversy.
My personal opinion is that Iran needs to be commended for trying to build a nuclear power plant. My arugement for this opinion is complex. Yet it boils down to several key points. First, if Iran was to try to wholly rely on the burning of fossil fuels, it would contribute significantly to pollution and environmental catastrophe. Next, Iran is trying to develop itself and needs alternatives to fossil fuel. Lastly, Iran has not violated any international laws and must be allowed that right to determine its own energy policy.
When the Islamic Revolution occurred in 1979, the Iranian population was around 32 million. Today, Iran's population is close to 70 million. This population explosion has increased Iran's energy needs. The Iranian government has sought to 
expand the number of villages that have access to electricity, which has served to further raise the energy demands of the country. To compound matters, the Iranian economy is growing at around 6% per annum. With this growth comes an increased need for energy.
One would think that Iran could simply turn on the tap and open up the pipelines to its oil reserves and provide the country with more energy. However, since the 1970s, Iran's oil production has actually decreased! This is due to Western sanctions and the fact that Iran's petroleum industry needs a massive amount of upgrading and modernization, which it cannot easily procure due to the Western blockade. This, coupled with the fact that Iran's energy needs have increased, has forced the Iranians to become a net oil importer. As astounding as it may be to consider, one of the leading members of OPEC actually imports oil. When one considers the implications of this fact, it is easy to see why the Iranian government wants to explore nuclear energy as an alternative form of energy.
The last point is probably the most controversial, yet it remains true. Iran has in fact complied with requests from the International Atomic Energy Association (IAEA). Furthermore, Iran signed the nuclear non-proliferation treaty in 1968 and ratified it in 1970. While this was done under the Shah's government, the Islamic Revolution has not overturned this treaty. Therefore, Iran has a right, as recognized by international law, to develop nuclear energy as long as this is monitored by the IAEA.
The Rush Limbaugh's of the world love to point out that Iran may have the c
apability to enrich uranium. Yet so far, Iran has in fact complied with all IAEA requests. Furthermore, if one reads the wording of the non-proliferation treaty, it allows for uranium enrichment as long as this is done for peaceful purposes. Therefore, Iran is commiting no violation of any treaty, to which it is a party, by simply enriching uranium.
Add this to the fact that Iran's current known uranium deposits can produce the same amount of electricity as 45 Billion barrels of oil. Iran has just over 90 billion barrels of known oil reserves. However, some are in locations difficult to extract. Therefore, it is unlikely that all of their oil will ever be extracted. Thus, the Iranians could theoretically supply their own energy needs from nuclear energy and export all of their oil for profit, thereby improving the standard of living.
The United States and western governments assume that simply because Iran has a nuclear energy programme, this programme will be used to develop nuclear weapons. It is hypocritical to deny Iran this right. It is also cynical to force Iran to burn a non-renewable energy source when it can save this valuable resource and position itself to be an even larger player in the oil industry in years to come. Furthermore, the west did not protest too vehemently when Pakistan, another Islamic country that is far less stable than Iran, developed nuclear capabilities. Furthermore, Iran has repeatedly sought to eliminate nuclear weapons in the entire region (including in Israel). While this is obviously a political move designed to embarrass Israel, one must consider the brutal usage of weapons of mass destruction that Sadam Hussein's Iraqi forces hurled against the Iranians. The propinquity of the Iran-Iraq War has not allowed the Iranians to forget the destructive nature of these weapons. Could it not be possible that they simply want to eliminate these weapons in the region to protect themselves from the possibility that they could again be victimized by such weapons?
It is my hope that the Obama administration develops a velleity to help Iran develop its energy capabilities in a safe manner. If the Americans feel as though Iran is an enemy, then perhaps the old adage about keeping your friends close and your enemies closer should hold true and the Iranians should be brought into the family of nations rather than ostracized like a criminal step-child.
Many of this blog's readers do not understand nor follow American football (I'm not talking about soccer). They have one of the greatest players in American football history (Peyton Manning) and have been a model of success for the past decade or so.
ve a serious problem with this logic. Only two teams in the history of American football have ever gone through a regular season undefeated. The 1972 Miami Dolphins, who went on to win the Super Bowl, and the 2006 New England Patriots, who lost the Super Bowl. Thus, the Colts had a chance to do something rarely done. Yet, they decided to forgo that opportunity for a chance to win the Super Bowl. Every year, someone wins the Super Bowl. Rarely does a team go undefeated. In short, the Colts passed on a chance to be one of the greatest teams in history to help their chances of being the best team this year.
