|
by Farhad Ibragimov March 23, 2026 from RT Website
RT composite. © Wikipedia Getty Images / vchal
Tehran weighs whether to uphold a religious ban or embrace nuclear deterrence amid rising threats...
Essentially, the Foreign Ministry has subtly
indicated that Tehran is shifting from previous dogmatic certainty
towards a potential revision of its nuclear doctrine.
In the Muslim world, especially within the Shia tradition to which Iran belongs, a fatwa is not merely a theological opinion; it serves as an authoritative legal ruling from the highest religious authority (the Marja'al-Taqlid) and carries significant normative weight.
For Shia society, particularly within Iran's theocratic model, such decrees hold both religious and political-legal significance, shaping the boundaries of acceptable state behavior.
Consequently, for nearly three decades, Iranian
officials have consistently cited this fatwa as evidence of their
lack of intention to pursue the development of nuclear weapons.
Furthermore, he asserted that Iran was not close to developing nuclear weapons and had not shown any strategic intent to do so.
This admission from a former US official
significantly undermines the traditional American propaganda
narrative about an "inevitable nuclear threat" coming from Tehran.
In contrast, Israel is not a party to the NPT:
However, a fatwa in the Shia legal tradition is not an absolute or unchanging doctrine.
Rather, it is a theological-legal ruling that can be reassessed or even revoked based on changing circumstances, new knowledge, or shifts in the political-security landscape.
Furthermore, with the appointment of a new
supreme leader, previous religious and legal positions may adapt to
current realities. In this context, Mojtaba Khamenei theoretically
holds the full religious legitimacy to issue a new fatwa that
considers the evolving international situation, including the state
of conflict and national security threats.
Traditionally, taqiyya allows for concealing true intentions or temporarily adjusting external behavior when faced with threats to life, faith, or community.
More broadly, this principle can be applied to state strategy:
Discussions on whether Iran should possess nuclear weapons have been going on in the country for decades, both among experts and within the upper echelons of power.
These discussions are part of a major strategic debate in which different approaches to national security clash.
Advocates for nuclear armament argue from a deterrence perspective:
Reports suggest that similar views were present within the circle of the late supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.
The rationale is straightforward:
The example of North Korea is often cited to illustrate the effectiveness of such a strategy.
During the early months of Donald Trump's first presidential term, Washington's rhetoric toward Pyongyang was harsh and confrontational.
However, once it became clear that North Korea possessed real nuclear capabilities, the approach shifted:
Since then, the topic of military action against North Korea has largely faded from discussion.
Experts interpret this as evidence supporting the argument ,
In the case of North Korea, there was also a high
risk of retaliation against US allies in the region (South Korea and
Japan) if the White House were to pursue aggression against
Pyongyang.
In the early 2000s, then-Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi abandoned the pursuit of weapons of mass destruction in exchange for promises of normalized relations with the West and security guarantees.
However, by 2011, Libya faced a NATO military intervention, leading to the ousting of Gaddafi during a 'color revolution' instigated by European powers and Washington and ultimately, his death.
This case has reinforced Iran's perception that
relinquishing deterrent capabilities does not guarantee safety;
rather, it can increase a nation's vulnerability.
Ayatollah Ali Khamenei's position was more complex, however.
As both a religious authority and an experienced politician, he recognized the rational arguments of those advocating for nuclear deterrence while also weighing significant regional risks.
If Iran acquires nuclear weapons, it could trigger a chain reaction of nuclear proliferation across the Middle East, with Türkiye potentially launching similar programs, followed by Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Qatar, and Egypt.
The region, already marked by high conflict,
would find itself in a precarious strategic balance with multiple
nuclear actors.
This approach has allowed Iran to maintain room
for negotiation while avoiding drastic actions that could lead to
large-scale escalation.
The appointment of Mojtaba Khamenei as the new
supreme leader coincided with a sharp deterioration in foreign
relations and a major escalation of the conflict. This shift
suggests that the strategy of patience employed by Ali
Khamenei may no longer yield the same results.
The resolution of this issue will depend not only
on ideological considerations but also on a pragmatic assessment of
the threats facing the nation amid ongoing aggression.
The question of potentially revising the fatwa has long been anticipated.
The edict issued by Ali Khamenei was shaped by different political realities, and its practical applicability is now inevitably under scrutiny. The international landscape is shifting, as is the context in which religious and legal interpretations are made.
In Shia tradition, such decisions cannot be divorced from reality; they are tied to considerations of practicality and security, and can be re-evaluated in light of escalating threats.
In this sense, the principle allows for
adjustments to previous positions when it comes to protecting the
state and society.
Mojtaba Khamenei, with his theological
background and standing at the heart of the country's
decision-making processes, undoubtedly understands this and
recognizes the significant responsibility placed upon him in this
new political context.
Rather, it serves as a carefully crafted signal that Iran's nuclear doctrine may enter a phase of potential reassessment, where religious, legal, and geopolitical dimensions are intricately intertwined.
|
