Ceasefire leaves Iran’s nuclear-missile complex unresolved amid geopolitical power asymmetries and regional insecurity

Iran’s nuclear program is rooted in a long tradition of scientific excellence, including contributions by Persian polymaths like Avicenna and Alhazen, whose work in optics and chemistry laid foundational knowledge for modern physics. The program’s development under sanctions has relied on indigenous innovation networks, such as university labs and private sector adaptations, which are rarely acknowledged in Western coverage. Traditional Persian concepts of *‘ilm* (knowledge) as a communal good contrast with the privatized, militarized framing of nuclear technology in global discourse.

The 1953 CIA-backed coup against Prime Minister Mohammad Mossadegh, who nationalized Iran’s oil industry, created a deep-seated distrust of Western powers and a narrative of nuclear technology as a tool for sovereignty. The Iran-Iraq War (1980–1988) saw Saddam Hussein’s use of chemical weapons—enabled by Western support—reinforcing Iran’s pursuit of a nuclear deterrent as a survival strategy. The collapse of the JCPOA in 2018 under Trump’s ‘maximum pressure’ campaign mirrored historical patterns of broken agreements, such as the 1979 Algiers Accords, which failed to prevent the U.S. hostage crisis.

In Shia Islam, the concept of *‘mahdi’* (the hidden imam) and the tradition of *‘ghaybat’* (occultation) frame nuclear technology as a latent power awaiting revelation, which some Iranian leaders have invoked to justify its strategic ambiguity. Gulf Arab states, particularly Saudi Arabia, view Iran’s nuclear program through the lens of *‘khawarij’* (deviant sects), framing it as an existential threat to Sunni dominance, despite their own covert nuclear ambitions. In Israel, the nuclear program is justified under *‘never again’* theology, while Iran’s program is framed as a *‘second Holocaust’* scenario, revealing a clash of historical traumas and mythologies.

Iran’s nuclear program operates within the constraints of the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), which allows for peaceful nuclear energy but is often weaponized in geopolitical discourse. The IAEA’s safeguards regime has repeatedly confirmed that Iran’s nuclear activities are non-diverted, yet Western intelligence agencies continue to allege undeclared activities, highlighting the politicization of scientific verification. The program’s missile capabilities are rooted in indigenous rocket science, with designs tracing back to 1980s Scud missiles modified for precision, reflecting a legacy of sanctions-driven innovation.

Persian miniature art and calligraphy often depict nuclear symbols as metaphors for both destruction and enlightenment, reflecting the duality of technology in Islamic thought. The poetry of Hafez and Rumi is invoked in Iranian discourse to frame nuclear technology as a ‘double-edged sword,’ capable of both harm and progress. In Israel, nuclear ambiguity is reinforced by the concept of *‘am segulah’* (chosen people), which imbues the program with a sacred, almost messianic aura, while in Iran, it is framed as a *‘defense of the oppressed’* (*‘defa’ az mazlum’*).

A regional nuclear arms race is likely if Iran’s program advances, with Saudi Arabia, Turkey, and Egypt pursuing indigenous capabilities, while Israel may preemptively strike to maintain its monopoly. The collapse of the JCPOA could lead to a ‘nuclear tipping point’ where Iran enriches uranium to weapons-grade levels, triggering a U.S. or Israeli military response and a broader Middle East conflict. Alternative futures include a revived JCPOA with stricter verification, a regional security framework (e.g., a Middle East WMD-free zone), or a decentralized deterrence model where non-state actors acquire nuclear capabilities.

Iranian women scientists, who make up 30% of the nuclear workforce, are often erased in Western narratives that frame the program as a male-dominated military project. Kurdish and Baloch communities in Iran, who bear the brunt of sanctions and military tensions, are rarely consulted in discussions about the program’s future. Palestinian and Lebanese voices in the diaspora are instrumentalized in regional narratives, with their security concerns either ignored or weaponized to justify opposing camps.