The Iran Paradox

Gaudium et Spes warns us of the threat of global annihilation at the hands of amassed nuclear arsenals, and condemns not only the use, but stockpile, of such weapons. During the aftermath of the Second World War and the onset of the Cold War, such a scenario seemed not only possible, but even likely. Since then, multiple treaties and accords have been made, and international organizations have been formed, fostering disarmament among developed nuclear nations. It would seem, at first glance, that the words of the Church carried some sort of wisdom. However, how do the lessons of Gaudium et Spes instruct us to interact with a nation such as Iran?

Let's look some facts:
1) Iran has continued to build up nuclear technologies, despite international involvement and intervention.
2) Iran has threatened to use such an arsenal against developed nations, including the United States, without any sense of self-preservation. This is not an act of self-defense; it is aggression.
3) Iran has gone ahead with nuclear development, not giving sincere thought to the rehabilitation of it's own struggling economy.

As insightful and powerful as Gaudium et Spes may be in the canon of Church teaching, no one at the council seemed to have predicted the Iran Paradox. What is the Catholic response to this rampant fear-mongering and warlike behavior? Gaudium et Spes advocates for international involvement, yet all the pressure of united developed nations, both soft and hard, have failed to halt, or even stall, Iran's nuclear program. Iran's leaders do not seek self-defense, stockpiling, or the well-being of their population; they only seem to desire the harm and destruction of others. Perhaps it is time the Catholic church reexamined this issue of nuclear war and terror, and ask the hardest question: can we dialogue with a nation whose leaders speak only of doing harm to others? Or does there come a point when words fall short, and action is necessary? What sort of action, then, must we take?

The message of the Church in the face of strife is reconciliation; is there a way to embrace the people of Iran, and build a relationship? It seems that the world should focus on the development of the Iranian people, and build up the populace of the country, rather than condemn the leaders. In reconciliation, there is an emphasis on relationship, as opposed to forgiveness, which is more focused on the absolution of guilt and action. By addressing the matter of relationship between peoples rather than the actions of leaders, perhaps the world has a chance to reach out to a struggling people, rather than participating in an endless power struggle. Relationships based on the common good of others, rather than demanding apologies and concessions in exchange for forgiveness, should take precedence in the vocabulary of international dialogue in this ongoing struggle. It is this that the Church advocates for in terms of enduring global cooperation. Maybe then can we find harmony and compatibility on these common ground of providing for the needs of all.

Source: http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2014/02/28/iran-nuclear-economic-advance/5835935/