Iran Plans to Buy Chinese J-10C Instead of Russian Su-35

[SABRE]

View attachment 143399

Samuel Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order (1996), p. 20
“The West’s universalist pretensions increasingly bring it into conflict with other civilizations… the possession of nuclear weapons by a non-Western civilization is the ultimate symbol of equality, and thus a profound threat to Western dominance.”

John Mearsheimer, University of Chicago, June 2025 interview
“From the Western perspective, Iran with the bomb is not just another nuclear power; it is the spearhead of a rival civilization acquiring the ability to negate Western escalation dominance.”

Bernard Lewis (Princeton, 2009 lecture, Washington Institute)
“A nuclear-armed Iran would shatter the image of Western technological supremacy and embolden the entire Islamic world to demand a new global hierarchy.”

Huntington's logic is partially correct but as usual he reeks of fearmongering, to tacitly reinforce that the Western powers should not allow anymore non-Western states to become nuclear. At the time of his writing (1996) only Russia and China were nuclear powers powers outside of the Western hemisphere. However, three Asian countries have become nuclear power since then and only one of them (India) harbors global ambitions but falls short of it, although it may disagree with this fact.

From the little that I know of Bernard Lewis I do not hold him in high regards and find him obtuse and bias, and based purely on what you have cited, he clearly misses the mark. Nuclear armed Iran in no way "would shatter the image of Western technological supremacy." In a sense this was already done when USSR, China, India, Pakistan, and DPRK acquired nukes - yet only one of these countries (China) has achieved technological advancements, and nuke tech has nothing to do with it. A nuclear Iran would just be a "nuclear Iran." It will have no other technological advancements over the US or the West. A nuclear Iran will also not "embolden the entire Islamic world to demand a new global hierarchy." Hardly any Muslim country with sovereignty intact would rally behind Iran (didn't happen in Pakistan's case either).

IMO, both Huntington and Lewis harbored ulterior motives in their writings, which were often Islamophobic and anti-Global South. I would pick Mearsheimer for studying IR any day. Thus far his arguments have been quite rational.

 

[NGAD IS THE BEST]

Every country does not want other countries to have nuclear weapons, but would like to have them themselves, while at the same time they would recognize the rights of countries that have already acquired them. Preventing nuclear proliferation is internationally recognized as politically correct. We need to properly recognize this absurd rule and adopt a reasonable attitude towards it.

Lol, this is called DOUBLE STANDARD

 

[NGAD IS THE BEST]

Would Pakistan ad US support Iran to have nukes ?

US not but Pakistan did help Iran for their nuclear Program in distant past

 

[Aziqbal]

Iran needs to stop talking and start buying

 

[mythbuster]

Would Pakistan ad US support Iran to have nukes ?

Nope .... certainly no .

 

[muhammed45]

Huntington's logic is partially correct but as usual he reeks of fearmongering, to tacitly reinforce that the Western powers should not allow anymore non-Western states to become nuclear. At the time of his writing (1996) only Russia and China were nuclear powers powers outside of the Western hemisphere. However, three Asian countries have become nuclear power since then and only one of them (India) harbors global ambitions but falls short of it, although it may disagree with this fact.

From the little that I know of Bernard Lewis I do not hold him in high regards and find him obtuse and bias, and based purely on what you have cited, he clearly misses the mark. Nuclear armed Iran in no way "would shatter the image of Western technological supremacy." In a sense this was already done when USSR, China, India, Pakistan, and DPRK acquired nukes - yet only one of these countries (China) has achieved technological advancements, and nuke tech has nothing to do with it. A nuclear Iran would just be a "nuclear Iran." It will have no other technological advancements over the US or the West. A nuclear Iran will also not "embolden the entire Islamic world to demand a new global hierarchy." Hardly any Muslim country with sovereignty intact would rally behind Iran (didn't happen in Pakistan's case either).

IMO, both Huntington and Lewis harbored ulterior motives in their writings, which were often Islamophobic and anti-Global South. I would pick Mearsheimer for studying IR any day. Thus far his arguments have been quite rational.

Only Iran among the Islamic countries is a non aligned country. Islam is religion of friendship but also religion of non alignment when it comes to political regime.

 

[ziaulislam]

It's all propaganda for domestic audience, fact is Usa Israel EU GCC will not allow anyone to sell advance weapons to Iran, the aim was to over the decades destroy Iran but lucky for Iran they developed missiles which give them some form of defence/offensive capability or else we would witness daily bombing of Iran.

After this war Iran must be careful on international platforms, slowly get all the attention away from them, become closer to China and Pakistan, but this will only happen if Iran stops it's aggressive statements against the west. China will not sell advance weapons to Iran whilst Iran has aggressive foreign policy (in statements ofcourse).

I doubt iran is even interested itself..it knows that it has no foe that wants to occupy it(all neighbors are peaceful) so it focus on proxy war and milita etc

 

[ziaulislam]

There was no J-10C 20 years ago.

You can trace iran buying su30 from early 2000s and j10 from early 2013 on google

 

[ziaulislam]

There was no J-10C 20 years ago.

When there is will there is a way, iran would have gotten su30 or j10 or any other fighter if it was really interested in its airforce..its not. It doesnt care about airforce

 

[MH.Yang]

Lol, this is called DOUBLE STANDARD

Do you think the Pakistani government would support other countries having nuclear weapons? Do you think Iran will support other countries having nuclear weapons after they acquire them? When every country has a double standard on this issue, we need to focus on how to solve the actual problem in the first place.

 

[mythbuster]

Even without nukes Iran has been a nuisance , just imagine Iran with nukes !

 

[SABRE]

Do you think the Pakistani government would support other countries having nuclear weapons? Do you think Iran will support other countries having nuclear weapons after they acquire them? When every country has a double standard on this issue, we need to focus on how to solve the actual problem in the first place.

1. Doesn't really matter to Pakistan, but officially the government would voice the opposition - because that's the responsible thing to do.

2. No nuclear Iran - that is and will be Pakistan's official stance.

Every country does not want other countries to have nuclear weapons, but would like to have them themselves, while at the same time they would recognize the rights of countries that have already acquired them. Preventing nuclear proliferation is internationally recognized as politically correct. We need to properly recognize this absurd rule and adopt a reasonable attitude towards it.

Vastly agree, although all the countries that have nukes have either acquired the tech through espionage or through direct support from an ally or allies. This includes the US. Nevertheless, so far the international game indeed is about being "politically correct" on non-proliferation.

US not but Pakistan did help Iran for their nuclear Program in distant past

Untrue. Pakistan (the state) did not help Iran. It was a rogue activity, which was mostly about sharing info on centrifuge designs and where to get centrifuge components, i.e., Europe (thus Europe is more complicit). No designs for nuclear explosive devices was shared - that we know of.

 

[SD 10]

buying j10 would be the smart decision but dont think it will happen. Iranian plans dont make no sense!

 

[Distant_Observer]

There are too many Indians involved in their military apparatus. Iranian drones in Ukraine were found to have Indian made parts.

We cannot risk technical data being leaked to our enemy.

Iran will have to do many reforms before this can become a possibility.

 

[NGAD IS THE BEST]

Do you think the Pakistani government would support other countries having nuclear weapons? Do you think Iran will support other countries having nuclear weapons after they acquire them? When every country has a double standard on this issue, we need to focus on how to solve the actual problem in the first place.

against opponent like Israel Muslim countries need nukes to keep Israel at bay