Governmentassignments...

United States Foreign Policy on Iran Nuclear Program

Student’s Name

Affiliation

United States Foreign Policy on Iran

Introduction

A foreign policy is an action plan that is established by a certain nation in its diplomatic interaction with another nation of interest (Davis, 2011). These policies are meant to stipulate a way forward on any contentious issues that are bound to come up between the two countries. The United States has developed a unique foreign policy for each country depending on economic, social and political needs among others. United States and Iran share an informal diplomatic tie which is indicated through having no ambassadors in their countries. Iran has some interest section within the Pakistan Embassy in Washington D.C while US interest section is via the Swiss embassy in Tehran (Davis, 2011). Increased interests saw the development of a virtual embassy online by the US in 2011. The main interest of the United States is to establish peace in the Gulf Region so as to continue benefiting from international trade, a major foreign exchange earner. By the year 2008, the trade between United States and Iran stood at $623 million (Ilias, 2010). The United States Census Bureau has observed a steady increase in American exports to Iran since the year 2007. The statistics do not include commercial activities through third party countries due to the established trade embargo. The United States Treasury Department issued approximately 11,000 special licenses to American organizations over the past ten years to directly trade with Iran (Ilias, 2010). Subsequent surveys by The United States Census Bureau in 2014 have indicated over $175 billion losses in trade and 279,000 lost job opportunities based on sanctions. This is a major economic concern for the United States and reducing the number of sanctions is a top priority in boosting the economy. This is one area in which the United States is striving to make changes through its foreign policies. Specifically, the nuclear threats posed by Iran are an issue of concern for the United States because of the unstable political environment in the Gulf Region. Increased insecurity in the region would translate to huge economic losses to the United States.

Iran Nuclear Programs

The current United State’s Obama administration has been concerned with nuclear development in Iran. The United States fails to recognize Iran’s right to nuclear power, thus persistence in halting the progress of related programs. Sanctions have been the main mode of controlling the Iran nuclear advancement initiatives, specifically the Iranian economy isolation meant to interrupt the circulation of money (Juneau & Razavi, 2013). The long-standing tension between the two countries has intensified, and any attempts to build mutual consensus have been unsuccessful. The defining factor is the unrelenting position by the United States in its demand that Iran stops its Uranium enrichment programs, a position unacceptable by the Iranians. Despite the imposed sanctions and other pressure activities, Iran pursued its programs enriching uranium up to 20% with President Mahmoud Ahmadinejd announcing in 2010 that Iran was officially a nuclear state (Warnaar, 2013). Later in 2012, American and Iranian officials made progress by initiating dialogue meant to open up negotiations over the nuclear stalemate.

Several minor and major incidences have build momentum for a hard lined negotiation. In the same year 2012, the United States Navy sent an alert on Iran's suicide attack boats preparation and its intensified naval force buildup activities in the Gulf region (Warnaar, 2013). The US navy fleet was then ready to prevent the intended blockage of Strait of Hormuz by Iran. A Minor trigger of tension involved the detention of three American hikers in 2009 over the Kurdish border (Juneau & Razavi, 2013). The official reports claimed the hikers unknowingly crossed into the Iranian territory while pursuing their leisure activities. Coincidentally, in 2009, there was widespread claim by Iran that the United States had abducted their top nuclear scientist by the name of Shahram Amiri. Amri had disappeared in May but in July, the British Broadcasting Corporation announced in July his refugee status at the Pakistani Embassy in Washington D.C. The drone incidences took center stage with the American CIA operated device being captured near Kashmar by Iranian forces (Davis, 2011). Iran proved the drone was caught flying in sovereign airspace and carefully captured by its cyber warfare unit amid claims of malfunctions and crash into Iran by the Americans. Production of live footages covering the incidence made the Americans backtrack on their original claim. Repeated incidences occurred where pursuit of a US drone by an Iranian fighter jet was interrupted by warnings from two US fighter jets to stop the chase over the Persian gulf in 2012 (Warnaar, 2013). These incidences have triggered questions over the US unconventional methods use in pursuing its intelligence and efforts to suppress Iranian nuclear development.

International Community

The international negotiations are overseen by the P5+ 1 countries comprised of the United Kingdom, China, France, the United States and Russia, plus Germany (Davis, 2011). Besides a Nuclear-Iran posing potential threats to the United States and its allies, the nuclear phenomenon could trigger an arms race in the gulf region thus escalating instability. This is also a dangerous position for the gulf region already characterized by surplus arms. Another angle to the United States worry stems from the claims Al-Qaeda operatives moved into Iran at the onset of the War in Afghanistan. The main issue of concern is Iran allowing these political prisoners to leave the country against the United Nations treaty (Juneau & Razavi, 2013). The obvious link between Al-Qaeda/ terrorism and intensive nuclear development efforts in Iran is a global worry.

Iran has been firm in its claims nuclear initiatives are intended for electricity generation while the United States insists it is for nuclear weapon development. The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) stated that Iran has violated the Safeguard Agreement related to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) (Warnaar, 2013). This arose from continued insufficient reporting on developments and handling of nuclear initiatives. The treaty under its section V allows states considered non-nuclear to participate in civilian nuclear energy programs. The tension heightened in 2006, when America and some European representatives got concerned about Iran's nuclear capacity in un-enriched uranium hexafluoride gas that would suffice in construction of ten atomic bombs (Warnaar, 2013). Despite the inability of un-enriched gas to be used in reactive processes, the international concern could not underestimate Iran’s ability to initiate an enrichment process.

Key Political Roles

The European Union (EU) has played an essential role in the prevention of a possible military escalation in the U.S. and Iran nuclear development program conflict. Germany, the United Kingdom and France also referred to as the E3, have equally contributed to the intensity in enhancing the dialogue and other forms of non-military negotiations (Davis, 2011). The control enjoyed is based on the EU and E3 pursuing Iranian compliance with set standards to guarantee the peaceful intention of the controversial nuclear development initiatives.

IAEA and NPT considerations have enhanced objective approach to the situation that eliminates possible personal interests of the parties prevailing in tackling the issue. These bodies act on general procedures and universal approaches in evaluation of every component related to the arising conflict in Iran’s nuclear development programs.

The P5+1 countries dialogue initiatives have yielded reasonable success in Iranian cooperation through spreading the global concern idea rather than the “American Syndrome” where countries consider issues addressed by the U.S. to be aimed at enhancing superiority (Davis, 2011).

The Obama administration has played a major role in progress of political negotiations through a promise always to pursue diplomacy and negotiations, rather than the hard lined military approach historically favored by the president predecessors.

Foreign Policy Decisions

The United States President Barrack Obama lifted a sanction of communications equipment and software to Iranian Civilians in May 2013. (Warnaar, 2013). However, in June 2013, he initiated expansion in sanctions targeting Iran currency and auto industry. The end of 2013 saw the success of an interim diplomatic agreement that was concluded and implemented to restrict nuclear development in Iran (Juneau & Razavi, 2013). Constant and progressive negotiation in Geneva between Iran and the P5+ 1 members has seen the release of various frozen overseas assets belonging to Iran. Trade embargos have been partially lifted in petrochemicals, precious metals and automotive industry.

Additionally, the Obama administration has promised to continue renewing previous exemptions contained in the oil sanctions that are enjoyed by countries including India and South Korea, who are the main customers to Iranian oil industry. Previous sanctions on insurance against loss of Iranian sea vessels have been put aside as at the end of the agreements held in Geneva 2013 (Warnaar, 2013). The conventions joint action plan contains compliance steps requesting Iran to disassemble part of its nuclear program that has potential in weapon construction. Reports from IAEA indicate high compliance levels of Iran in this agreement. Iran has allowed daily access to its nuclear plants and pledged to make further adjustments upon recommendations contained within the confines of the agreement. Notably, Iran has stopped expansion of its nuclear enrichment facilities, capped its stock of low-enriched uranium hexafluoride and halted the production of its 20% enriched uranium (Juneau & Razavi, 2013).

Once all the requirements of the Geneva agreement are observed, and Iran shows substantial progress in responsible nuclear material management, the United States has promised to suspend its sanctions gradually and completely lift the sanctions. The last United Nations initiated sanctions was made in 2010, but the U.S. and the European Union (EU) have since initiated additional penalties (Davis, 2011). Absolute relief on Iran sanctions will be granted once a comprehensive agreement is set up to replace the interim Geneva agreement.

Conclusion

The nuclear change in foreign policy with regards to the Iran nuclear advancement is one of the few initiatives by America that struggle to acquire universal benefit to its citizens and the rest of the world. America through history has been known to change its foreign policy in relation to what goes around the world irrespective of the connection to the United States. The fact that Iran is willing to have negotiation and talks with the United States , stands as a testimony through history of the power these instruments carry (Juneau & Razavi, 2013). Objective analysis of sanctions should be able to explain the underlying reasons rather than confrontation and questioning of the motives. It took joint efforts of several countries to address both sides’ interests and seek amicable solutions. America has totally refused to compromise its stand of stopping the nuclear programs and has restricted the current negotiations and agreement to the Iranian nuclear program development. Attempts by Iran to make amends in other areas to list sanctions related to the nuclear program have been rejected (Juneau & Razavi, 2013). On the other hand, Iran has claimed infiltration of American intelligence for private investigations parallel to the agreement held in Geneva. No official reaction has been made but America has sworn to comply and hold onto its pledges with continued cooperation from Iran.

References

Davis, L. (2011). Iran's nuclear future: critical U.S. policy choices. Santa Monica, CA: RAND.

Ilias, S. (2010). Iran's Economic Conditions: U. S. Policy Issues. Collingdale, PA: DIANE Publishing.