Some would argue that Ahmadinejad, in rare form, has attempted to enter into a cooperative agreement with the United States. When asked of his willingness to work alongside the United States, Ahmadinejad said, “Peace and security and friendship.  These are principles which cannot happen without sincere cooperation. Everyone should enter into a sincere cooperation.  And work together.” (MSNBC)

The political language represented by the President Obama’s rhetoric, however, has had little impact on Ahmadinejad’s campaign to attain nuclear capabilities. Rather than viewing international attempts to curb the spread of nuclear capabilities as a global process, Ahmadinejad suggests that “…for a state to think that it is the sole maker of decisions and others should follow in its footsteps, that is wrong, they are mistaken.” (MSNBC) Some would argue that the fundamental error in his logic is the assumption that the United States is seeking to regulate the world’s nuclear capabilities, which is incorrect.

As I have written in my discussion of the A.Q. Khan Network, dual-use technologies with nuclear capabilities can present grave problems for international regulators seeking to hamper the spread of potential nuclear weapons. As President Obama said in his address, the world cannot sit by and wait for the United States to fix its problems. Dual-use technologies present a very real threat to international peace and the peacekeeping process.

Ahmadinejad’s primary argument rests on what he considers a double standard, wherein “…the danger lies – in the warheads, which have been stockpiled in Britain, in the U.S., in a handful of other countries. And some states announce that this is where their power rests. And based on these arsenals, they want to rule the world.  We think that if we are fair and just everything will be resolved.” (MSNBC)

The difficulty in mitigating the tensions in perception between the United States and Iran lies in addressing the use of nuclear capabilities, which is easier said than done.  If the West views a nuclear capable Iran as a potential threat to the peace process and potentially destabilizing the region, and Iran views U.S. involvement and attempts to suppress its nuclear capabilities as an abuse of power, there is a very dangerous tension building below the surface.

Just the concept of a nuclear capable Iran cannot and should not lead to military actions; such was the error of the last president and Gen. Powell in attacking Iraq on the basis of WMD, which after later inquires turned out to be fallacious. No military actions should be taken against Iran until they have clearly demonstrated a potential to weaponize whatever nuclear technologies they have or may develop. Preemptive attacks have only tarnished our international reputation and respectability. We have spiraled into an economic depression as a result of or commitments in Iraq, and with an existing war in Afghanistan, there should be absolutely no talks of military involvement in Iran.