Again the dispute over NPT; Leave or stay? The announcement of the opinion of some political circles on the continued presence of Iran in the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) has again brought this issue to the media level and revived the old but now very sensitive debate: should Iran still remain within the NPT under the new security conditions and after experiencing recent military attacks from military attacks from this country, or can Iran be dragged within the NPT? Supporters of the withdrawal believe that continuing to participate in an agreement that failed to protect the country from security threats could be restrictive and the withdrawal could change the calculations of the other side. But opponents warn that deterrence is not created simply by increasing the other party's costs; Instead, it must be seen what new costs a decision will create for Iran itself and whether it can reduce the possibility of conflict or, on the contrary, increase it. Now Iran's problem is not only to choose between "stay" and "leave"; The main issue is designing a strategy that can balance deterrence, security, nuclear rights and the possibility of diplomacy. The experience of recent years has shown that none of the membership in the convention or withdrawal from it alone guarantees national security. What is important is the policy system that follows each decision. For this reason, returning the NPT debate to the public sphere can be seen as an opportunity for a more detailed discussion on the future of Iran's nuclear file; A dialogue in which the costs of leaving are not ignored nor the experience of pressures and attacks from the past. A decision of such strategic dimensions, more than anything else, requires the simultaneous measurement of deterrence power, diplomatic ability, economic costs, and the possible response of foreign actors. Read the full text at the link below:

Again the dispute over NPT; Leave or stay? The announcement of the opinion of some political circles on the continued presence of Iran in the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) has again brought this issue to the media level and revived the old but now very sensitive debate: should Iran still remain within the NPT under the new security conditions and after experiencing recent military attacks from military attacks from this country, or can Iran be dragged within the NPT? Supporters of the withdrawal believe that continuing to participate in an agreement that failed to protect the country from security threats could be restrictive and the withdrawal could change the calculations of the other side. But opponents warn that deterrence is not created simply by increasing the other party's costs; Instead, it must be seen what new costs a decision will create for Iran itself and whether it can reduce the possibility of conflict or, on the contrary, increase it. Now Iran's problem is not only to choose between "stay" and "leave"; The main issue is designing a strategy that can balance deterrence, security, nuclear rights and the possibility of diplomacy. The experience of recent years has shown that none of the membership in the convention or withdrawal from it alone guarantees national security. What is important is the policy system that follows each decision. For this reason, returning the NPT debate to the public sphere can be seen as an opportunity for a more detailed discussion on the future of Iran's nuclear file; A dialogue in which the costs of leaving are not ignored nor the experience of pressures and attacks from the past. A decision of such strategic dimensions, more than anything else, requires the simultaneous measurement of deterrence power, diplomatic ability, economic costs, and the possible response of foreign actors. Read the full text at the link below: