The Iran Nuclear Deal: Retain or Abolish? Currently, The USA position about Iran nuclear deal has been one of the most controversial topics in the political and international affairs fields. People are taking sides about what should be the best decision for the USA government. Should the USA tear up the deal or stay in it?
During these past days, the news is so focused on the subject ‘’Iran,’’ here are some headlines: Scuttling the Iran deal will lead to another North Korea, how the Iran deal prevents a covert nuclear weapons program, the sun sets on a good Iran deal. The question is what all these headlines have in common? In my opinion, I think that the best decision for the USA government is to stay in the Iran nuclear deal for three
…show more content…
As president Trump’s reluctance to certify if Iran is following all the requirements, it illustrates that the deal remains under threat.
First all, the USA administration, president Donald Trump and some his political adviser, are willing to end up the USA involvement in the JCPOA and the US president claimed that it was the worse decision. For me, it was one of the most successful deals in the last years because it is preventing Iran from building nuclear weapons and provide improved transparency. Which means that under a nuclear agreement, Iran has the obligation to permit the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) to conduct a deep inspection on Iran’s nuclear facilities if IAEA requests to do so.
However, If Iran violates the agreement, it will severely punish and all sanctions will come back and Iran’ aliens will not be able to reverse the situation or block the sanction applied to Iran such as economic, political and others that can break the Iran economy. The US government can do nothing to stop Iran to improve its nuclear weapons. If Iran decided not to make new nuclear weapons, it was because they decided not to do it.
Some disagree that, ‘’the Obama administration is prepared to sign an agreement that will expire in a mere 10 years’ time. At this point, any restriction that the deal imposes on Iran would be vanish. Iran’s economy would be free from all nuclear-related sanctions and its government would be treated the same as any other
The article, written by David Sanger and Michael Gordon from The New York Times on August 23, highlights main controversies about Iran-US nuclear agreement. After months of negotiations between USA and Iran, the deal is waiting to be approved by Congress. However, there are many points of debate regarding the approval of this pact. The main point of polemic is the capacity of Iran to produce nuclear weapons after 15 years, when the agreement is supposed to end. Many people, like the Democrat Representative Adam B. Schiff from California, agree Iran would “have a highly modern and internationally legitimized enrichment capability” (Gordon & Sanger, 2015). Others argue in favor of the agreement because, as R. Nicholas Burns, undersecretary of
regarding the tense relationship between the U.S. And Iran in order to illicit a more
The Iran Deal was made by President Obama this past July to stop Iran from building any nuclear weapons. The U.S. has had several controversies with Middle Eastern countries in the past. One of Matthews’ political concepts is to “keep your enemies in front of you.” Although the U.S is trying to improve the relationships between these countries, such as creating an alliance with Israel, the Middle East is still a major concern. By making this agreement with Iran, President Obama has given the U.S. the opportunity to keep an eye on the “enemies.” However, if either nation decides to break any prior promises, we could go to a long and costly war. Using Matthews’ tactic to see the enemy, and a with a drastic alternative for both countries, we can have more confidence that this conflict will not
Now is the time to use the power of American diplomacy to pressure Iran to stop their illicit nuclear program, support for terrorism, and threats toward Israel. Obama and Biden will offer the Iranian regime a choice. If Iran abandons its nuclear program and support for terrorism, we will offer incentives like membership in the World Trade Organization, economic investments, and a move toward normal diplomatic relations. If Iran continues its troubling behavior, we will step up our economic pressure and political isolation. In carrying out this diplomacy, we will coordinate closely with our allies and proceed with careful preparation. Seeking this kind of comprehensive settlement with Iran is our best way to make
They commended the parties for finding value and diplomacy and for seeking peaceful political solutions. However strenuous it may seem, that was evident in July, when the parties agreed to extend the period of the negotiations for another four months to give themselves more time to close the underlying gaps. They have continued the talks on P5+1 Iran’s nuclear program. The representatives of those countries are negotiating a comprehensive plan of action that, once implemented, would ensure that Iran does not acquire a nuclear weapon and that Iran’s nuclear program is exclusively peaceful. They seek to finalize such arrangements by 24 November of this year. Hopefully the negotiation goes well. In the meantime, the Council and its Iran Sanctions Committee must ensure the continued implementation of United Nations sanctions. We have been troubled to hear reports of confusion as to whether the sanctions remain in effect during the period of negotiations. Although the P5+1 offered Iran some limited and reversible sanctions relief as part of the joint plan of action, the plan included no changes to United Nations sanctions. The role of the 1737 Committee in support of the P5+1 process is vital to its success. We agree with the Chair that only the Security Council itself can alter the sanctions measures applied by the
There are seven key points in this nuclear deal: Iran has to reduce their centrifuges, reduce their uranium enrichments, they can’t over produce anything nuclear for at least two months, their Fordow Facility has to stop producing uranium for fifteen years, they can keep doing research and development but can only do it with a break of three months, they will have inspection by the U.N., and we have to lift our sanctions that we have on Iran. President Barrack Obama said this deal, “is not built on trust, it is built on verification.” (Cato Institute 1/3) This applies to the quote by Barrack Obama wanting to make history. He wants to ensure the safety on America by declining the top producing nuclear war-heads country in the world, their production of nukes. President Obama will go into the books by already stopping a future nuclear
Moreover, Iran will be able to access 100 billion dollars of assets that are frozen in overseas banks. However, if Iran violates the JCPOA there is a provision within the contract to implement the sanctions back on Iran. Consequently, the JCPOA international agreement was signed in Vienna on July 14, 2015 by Iran and the P5+1 nations. The Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid stated “A nuclear-armed Iran would pose the gravest imaginable threat to Israel. If America walks away from this agreement and loses the support of our allies in the sanctions regime, Iran could have enough fissile material to make a nuclear bomb in a matter of months. Iranian leaders have regularly stated that they intend to wipe Israel off the map and I believe those threats should be taken with the utmost seriousness. This agreement is the best way to prevent Iran’s leaders from obtaining the nuclear weapons that would empower them to follow through on their threats to Israel.” (U.S. Democratic Leader Harry Reid >> Reid Statement On The Joint Comprehensive Plan Of Action.). Therefore, the majority of Democrats support the JCPOA and believe it is a better alternative to peace than using a military preemptive strike on Iranian nuclear facilities (Joint Comprehensive Plan of
On the White House website, a 112 pages’ document called the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) gives some detailed about the deal with Iran. It says that the deal:
The democrats in the U.S. Senate block a Republican attempt to stop the nuclear deal with Iran, handing President Barack Obama a major victory. Senate Republicans do not have enough votes to end a Democratic filibuster on the resolution of approval. Iran's highest leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, says there will be no further negotiations with the U.S. beyond the nuclear deal. The Republicans in the U.S. Senate attempt to stop the nuclear deal by pushing through a resolution rejecting it. In the deal, Iran has agreed to reduce its stockpile of enriched uranium by 98%, place two-thirds of their installed centrifuges under international supervision, give the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) permanent access "where necessary, when necessary",
OPTION 1: Continue to support the P5+1 Alliance and hold the IRI to strict accountability of all provisions outlined in the JCPOA. Utilizing public diplomacy, communicate that violations to the JCPOA will be seen as cause for the U.S. to seek an exit from the JCPOA. Make clear that significant violations would also introduce all instruments of statecraft to deter Iran from becoming a nuclear weapon state. If the IRI continues to meet its obligations, and prior to the expiration of JCPOA enrichment limitations, the U.S. should attempt to negotiate a separate Section 123 like agreement with the IRI. The proposed bilateral agreement will further restrict any future enrichment activities to levels deemed acceptable by the U.S. As an
have nuclear and hydrogen weapons, but for Iran, which is not a member of NATO and its security is not guaranteed by any country in the world, the simple principle of self-defense becomes so problematic?” (Vaez, 2017). The JCPOA satisfies Iran’s demand for increased influence while maintaining the priority of international nuclear stability. With worldwide peace and proliferation safeguards an international interest, the United States should utilize a selective engagement mindset, specifically in regards to a great powers focus, to maintain leverage and unity within the multilateral agreement, “Selective engagement endeavors to ensure peace among powers that have substantial industrial and military potential – the great powers” (Posen, & Ross, 2000). By prioritizing vital interests, the great powers can develop a collaborative and effective strategy to force Iranian nuclear cessation and maintain unity to avoid Iranian partnerships with nations seeking to increase their sphere of influence. Additionally, the international response to Iran establishes a
JCPOA stipulated each party commitments and rights. It also defined how to settle differences among parties, if appeared and each part might what to do in case of unilateral violations done by another party. Under JCPOA and Security Council resolution 2231, If Iran does not comply its commitments and these noncompliance verified by IAEA, then snap back sanctions being activated. If US does not comply its
The United States and Israel would be in danger. In my opinion if a country is willing to use chemical weapons during war and threaten to destroy an entire country and commit genocide, they should not be allowed to have any sort of nuclear power at all. The supreme leader even said on a live broad cast that we had watched my senior year that said "Death to America". It is said that history repeats its self, what is happening now happened in 1938 when Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain went to speak with Adolf Hitler about negotiation. The prime minister left there thinking that Hitler's promises for peace were in good faith in exchange for Germanys annex large parts of Czechoslovakia The Nazi regime was a police state and Iran is a police state. The Nazis aim was to kill all the Jews in Europe and Iran's aim is to destroy Israel. The Nazis hated America and what it stands for and so does Iran. The alternative to this agreement was continuing and tightening the sanctions they were weakening the Iranian regime and greatly breaking down its abilities to fund terror groups. Also, the stronger Iran gets the more money they make means the more they will try and expand. The Iranian regime is a bunch of religious fanatics who are morally from ISIS, Al Qaeda Boko haram and all the other terrorist groups. Iran is the second highest country with executions right behind china. Iran is already one of the biggest funders to terrorist groups so just imagine what they can do with another $150,000,000,000. Imagine what it will do with the removal of the current weapons and missile embargo. Or the nuclear infrastructure with this deal it will do every single
First there are arguments that JCPOA will not succeed in preventing a nuclear Iran. The same article
The EU and the additional countries that are involved in the Iran deal, as well as President Trump’s security council are in support of signing and extending another 120 days. Hopefully, this will allow cooler heads to prevail and allow democracy to work.