There are many contradictions in your imaginary proposal,e.g.: Making a nuclear weapons necessitate Uranium enrichment a) and d). Making peace with israel inherently and implicitly guarantees the best political relation with U.S and negating threats from the allied. withdrawing from NPT(while iran is already a member) and starting to make nuclear weapons, will definitly make israelis to be suspected and worrisome and chalenge the relations. at the end for the purpose of enrichment Iran would need the help of chinese technology and its imports. the funniest part is that if ever khamenei make a truce with Israel which for the regime that being anti-israel is a part of its identity and legacy, such a deal is way impossible.
- By: persian on July 31, 2006

Nuclear weapons are the curse of mankind! Nations should not aspire to possess them. It's a fallacy to believe that possessing nuclear weapons would protect your sovereignty anyway. All of the nuclear weapons that the Soviet Union and its Eastern European allies possessed didn't protect their 'sovereignty' at all, did it? Their sovereignty crumbled away under the might of the will of their own people and the weapons of the government were useless against them. The sovereignty of the state simply refers to the stability of a given government. Governments are inherently unstable because of shifting alliances and the changing needs of people and the times we live in.
- By: Ben on July 29, 2006

"b) Make peace with Israel...d) Publicly start making the nuclear weapons -- to protect your sovereignty against the current U.S. empire" Very Funny! Based on this, you are suggesting that Iran could be good friends with Israel, yet hostile to the Unites States. Well, what gives Israel power is primarily its good relations with the Unites States. Israel would never engage in a deal to help 'protect' a country, that's hostile to the U.S., against its greatest ally. For Israel, such a relation with Iran would mean turning its back to the U.S., which would in term severly damage its own interests in the region. Besides, How could a country be friendly to Israel, yet hostile to the U.S.? If Iran were to radically change its foreign policy, it could simply befriend the U.S.. That would simply allow it to exit the NPT and even get nuclear technology from the U.S.. That is exactly what India is doing right now. The U.S. Congress is about to pass a legislation allowing the transfer of nuclear technology to India that would allow it produce nuclear bombs at a much faster rate. The Americans know it, but nobody dares to oppose it since India is America's new ally and a great rival for China in that region. All Iran needs to do is to change its policy towards the United States. If Iran embraces the idea of being the police in the Middle East, protecting the interests of the Unites States, the U.S. would allow it to do whatever it wished to do to 'ptotect its soverignty' -- though not exactly 'AGAINST the current U.S. empire'. Afterall, why does Iran have to always be against the empire while its objective is to have the greatest influence in the region, and knowing that the only force blocking such influence is the U.S.? All that said, if Khamenei was pragmatic and cared much about Iranian national interests, there would be much better proposals for him to consider than yours.
- By: Nima on July 25, 2006