kirisutogomen: (crab)
kirisutogomen ([personal profile] kirisutogomen) wrote2015-04-07 10:42 am

A Different Set of Conversations

"We want Iran not to have nuclear weapons precisely because we can't bank on the nature of the regime changing. That's exactly why we don't want to have nuclear weapons. If suddenly Iran transformed itself to Germany or Sweden or France then there would be a different set of conversations about their nuclear infrastructure."


I'm pretty sure that if Iran suddenly turned into Sweden, the different set of conversations that would ensue would no longer be about nuclear infrastructure at all, and would be much more ontological or at least would include some profound social constructivist questions.

[identity profile] psychohist.livejournal.com 2015-04-07 05:04 pm (UTC)(link)
Yeah. I don't think we want Sweden to have nuclear weapons either, but there's no argument since they don't want them.

What I want to know is, who was this addressing? Who was arguing that we can bank on Iran turning into a Germany or Sweden or France?

[identity profile] kirisutogomen.livejournal.com 2015-04-07 09:42 pm (UTC)(link)
I think he was indirectly responding to Netanyahu's push to require Iran to recognize the state of Israel as part of the nuclear deal. I think the President was saying that there was no way the current government of Iran would do that, so making that demand would be effectively just killing the whole deal.

I don't think Netanyahu is actually so detached from reality as to think that Iran is going to magically transform into Sweden, unless he's had some sort of massive psychotic break that has otherwise gone completely unnoticed.