The motion laid before us today is simple: the Proposition asserts the right of every nation to a nuclear arsenal. Let us stress that this is not a proposal requiring the world to arm itself with nuclear warheads, but an acknowledgement of the sovereignty of all nations and their right to self-governance. We believe that any nation infringing upon this right with coercive measures is violating said sovereignty and instigating tyranny in the façade of security, a tyranny that has brought war and destruction throughout the course of history. It is our belief that this obstruction of self-determination is not only unwarranted and unjust but also detrimental to the very security we claim to protect. It is for these reasons that the Proposition before you today is proud to propose this motion.

Sovereignty is not empty rhetoric; it is the sole inheritance of a people to ensure their unconstrained representation on the global stage. An infraction on a nation’s sovereignty is equivalent to silencing its citizens and imposing authoritative dominance over its government, a relic of a colonial era long past us. The Proposition believes that a nation’s sovereignty should only be encroached upon when its citizens have already lost their voice and fair representation in the face of unrelenting oppression (for humanitarian reasons and no other) or if it engages in deliberate acts of war, of which the production and storage of nuclear weapons is neither. Of the nine countries currently equipped with nuclear weapons (including the likes of North Korea), none have used their nuclear weapons as a pretense for war nor as a tool in the face of war aside from the United States in World War 2.

Self-determination allows a country the ability to judge and be judged in accordance to actions undertaken autonomously. The impediment of another nation’s right to self-realization without proper justification embeds a wrench between agent and one’s decisions, the consequence of which causes the sufferer to lose agent and in turn limits one’s decisions and distorts one’s morality.

Take for example an instance in which a gun control activist holds your daughter hostage because you are a gun owner and forces you to either dispose of your weapon or risk both of your lives. In this situation you are still provided with the freedom of choice, but the choices are limited and coerced. If you toss aside your gun, you and your daughter will live. This is far from the ideal situation in which you keep your gun and your daughter has not experienced being taken hostage, but it will suffice; after all, you both get to go on with your lives. However, the world is not that simple.

Take the above example and now add in uncertainty. You are uncertain whether or not the perpetrator will abide by their promise. You are worried that they may proceed with killing you and your daughter, or they may continue to keep your daughter hostage while forcing you to experience humiliation after humiliation even after you’ve submitted to the first stipulation. But wait. You are an ex-Special Forces agent. Instead of risking all of this treachery you can end it there and now. The only thing you must do is carry out one of the most inexcusable acts known to man: you must take his life. And without much hesitation, that is what you will do.

It’s what any father would do.

Now, let’s apply real-world actors to the above scenario. The hostage is the Iranian civilians, the father is the Iranian government, and the perpetrator is all nations currently imposing sanctions upon Iran. By chastising Iran’s sovereign right, holding its citizens hostage through sanctions, and clouding it with uncertainty, the perpetrators are inviting redemption. In this case, however, redemption is not simply murder; it is the justification of the sponsorship of terrorism by the Iranian government. And throughout all of this we have yet to address the most critical point:

The daughter will never forget the face of the man who took her hostage. In other words, the younger generations haunted by a state of economic despair and oppression turn their eyes full of malice to the outside and lose all traces of rationality. Tyranny breeds terror, terror fosters hate, and hate nurtures tyranny.

The irony of the situation? The gun control activist has a gun.