Nuclear proliferation issue has essentially been a global worry since 1945. The two categories that is, unproclaimed and proclaimed nuclear club of states are deeply conscious of this issue of proliferation. Actually, all the states that fall under these two categories have largely agreed on the necessity to maintain nuclear club exclusivity. Nuclear proliferation policy terrain was much changed by fall of Soviet Union.
For a long time, the Soviet Union and United States agreed on need for nonproliferation regime and cajoled, worked, and threatened the allies together with the others to refrain themselves from developing nuclear weapons. However, some states did not agree with this and Iran is a good example of these states. This state has actually decided to oppose the U.S policy interests and has even gone further and pursued the nuclear technology with assistance of some states like China, France, and Russia. Thus, the big question is whether a nuclear Iran is a threat to the global security.
Taking sides’ issue number 17 addresses the above question where the two authors in the two sides have views that are clashing about this question. Dore Gold has actually responded to this question by agreeing that a nuclear Iran is in fact a global security threat. He sees Iran as a global security threat due to the fundamentalist regime nature, its antipathy for United States and Israel, and finally its support that is clear for the international terrorism. In his argument, Iran is developing a bomb and its previous behaviors means that it is going to use this bomb. He goes further and argues that Uranium in this country might not be sufficient for the production of electricity but it is definitely sufficient for atomic bombs manufacturing (Harf 328).
On the other hand, Scott Horton does not believe that nuclear Iran is a threat to the global security. He argues that there has been a myth that has been created through governmental propaganda, outright falsehoods, and media misrepresentations that a nuclear Iran is actually a threat to the global security. He further argues that this state in fact acted within its treaty obligations and rights hence this does not present any threat. In supporting his arguments he even uses some examples of media distortions (Harf 332).
In conclusion, I agree with Dore that nuclear Iran is a threat to the global security because in the text we understand that this state has even funded terrorism against the Israel and in addition has supported the groups, which are opposed to the United States policy interests. For that reason, this clearly shows that country is a global security threat.
Harf, James E Taking sides. 7th ed. New York: McGraw-Hill, 2013.