Iran is an example how interventionism kicks back.
In 1951 the western powers, Great Britain and U.S., ousted the democratically elected prime minister Ali Razmara of Iran to enforce it’s interests to get control over it’s crude oil.
They installed the Shah, who was in power without democratic legitimization for years and was finally over turned by the radical Islamists in 1979.
Needless to say, that the new leaders learned from the way how the former prime minister was ousted and began to work possibly on a nuclear weapon to maintain it’s sovereignty.
The resulting political and armed opposition to all western allies in this context appears only logical. Same can be said to be true for North Korea.
According to U.S.: Iran is biggest threat to nuclear pact’s credibility
Iran’s nuclear program poses the greatest threat to the credibility of the global pact aimed at halting the spread of atomic weapons, a senior U.S. arms control official said on Monday.
The Islamic Republic has a “long history” of deceiving the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and its nuclear enrichment program far exceeds that needed for civilian use, said Thomas Countryman, Assistant Secretary for International Security and Nonproliferation.
“The actions of Iran and North Korea should concern every member of this conference,” Countryman told a news briefing.
“It is clear that if Iran succeeds in the project of constructing nuclear weapons, then it is not only the Helsinki meeting that becomes irrelevant, but it is in fact the entire credibility of this treaty.”
Countryman was referring to a decision last November to put off talks on banning atomic bombs in the Middle East that were due to have taken place in Helsinki in December.
Iran blamed the United States at the time for a “serious setback” to the NPT.
“The possession of such weapons by Iran constitutes a threat to the entire region and an impetus for greater proliferation, lateral proliferation of weapons, than we have ever seen.”
Iran’s acquisition of a nuclear weapon would be a “genuine tipping point and would cause more damage to the treaty than anything else that has occurred in its history”, he added.
Voice of Russia, Reuters