ArtsAutosBooksBusinessEducationEntertainmentFamilyFashionFoodGamesGenderHealthHolidaysHomeHubPagesPersonal FinancePetsPoliticsReligionSportsTechnologyTravel
  • »
  • Politics and Social Issues»
  • Middle East Political & Social Issues

Why is the Nuclear Agreement With Iran So Important? Why Must the United States Have Dialogue With Iran?

Updated on August 6, 2017

The Iranian Nuclear Issue is one of the most important international issues of the 21st century

Author’s note: this essay was first composed back in 2013 before the United States and the international community reached a nuclear agreement with Iran

As many of you know, the United States and Iran have had very bitter and tense relations following the 1979 revolution. In the last 30+ years, the United States and Iran have been adversaries with one side accusing the other of this and that. This has become a sort of political theater and it seems to me that both sides are playing games. This essay will attempt to explain and discuss the importance of the nuclear deal that was reached. The first part of the essay explains what led to the soured relations between the United States and Iran. The next part will discuss why dialogue with Iran is so important. The third part will discuss why war with Iran would be a terrible idea. And the last part of the essay will list a few specific details about the Nuclear Agreement.

How did relations between the United States and Iran get so tense?

We are in 2017 right now and almost 38 years have passed since the overthrow of Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, who was overthrown by the United States and British governments because he would not listen to them and the Shah was in charge of OPEC. Yes, that is the real truth about the Shah’s departure from Iran. The mainstream US media would want Americans to believe that he was overthrown by forces loyal to the late cleric Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini. The US and Great Britain helped Khomeini get into Iran where he arrived for good on February 1, 1979. While he was in charge of OPEC, the Shah would charge whatever price he wanted. The United States did not like this and they were responsible for his overthrow. There is not even a mention of this from the controlled US media. Former US President Jimmy Carter and his administration were in fact responsible for the Shah’s overthrow which led to the establishment of Iran’s current regime. This fact is out there and the circumstances surrounding the Shah’s demise are documented although the US media does not want you to know this. They do not want you to know this because they think that they are the good nation of the world while any nation that is not friendly to US interests is considered an enemy. This kind of thinking is exactly the reason why the US attacked Iraq. Iraq is now a country that is divided and highly unstable.

For over 30 years Iran and the United States have not had diplomatic relations with each other. The United States has continued to accuse Iran of using its nuclear technology to build nuclear weapons while Iran insists that it is only using that energy for peaceful purposes. Which side is telling the truth? It is hard to know at this point. But one thing is certain. As long as the United States uses language of force and coercion, nothing good will come out of it. The US has been doing this for over 30 years and where has this led to? It has led to nothing good. However, the hardliner stance by Iran’s Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei certainly does not contribute to a healthy relationship between the two nations. Once allies, the United States and Iran are like bitter adversaries.

The effectiveness of the Iran Nuclear Deal

Do you think that the Iran Nuclear Deal will be effective and work out?

See results

The importance of the United States trying to have dialogue with Iran

It seems that neither side in this scenario wants to communicate with each other but the United States cannot continue on the path that it is currently on. It is clear that some of the Iranian officials do not want to have relations with the United States but President Obama should at least try to have a dialogue with them. If you have a problem with somebody, the best answer is to try and resolve that problem with that person because if you don’t talk to them, there is no chance of ever resolving your problem. But if you at least attempt to have a dialogue, then there might be a chance. There is no guarantee that Iran will listen if the US tries to talk to them but my point is the United States should at least try to communicate with them. Relations between these two countries have been strained for far too long. Most other countries in the world currently have relations with Iran so there is no reason why the United States and Iran cannot have relations with each other. Yes, the United States does support Israel but there is no justification for the US to continue to treat Iran like an enemy because this treatment has only taken the United States into a position where it is considered to be the aggressor.

The United States government also does things it should not do. If the United States is so focused on human rights and peace, this is the time that they can show it.

The United States should act as a peacemaker in the world by adopting a foreign policy of peace and free trade with every nation as Thomas Jefferson suggested. The problem is that the United States does not follow his words of wisdom and as long as they don’t do this they will never feel safe and secure. It is time for the United States to stop all of this political theater and get down to the business of at least trying to have dialogue with Iran. If it is not successful, then at least the US can feel good that it at least tried to do this. President Obama said that he would talk to Iran in 2009 in that televised speech that he gave but so far he has not done so. The phrase “talk is cheap” really applies here. What the President said then is nothing more than empty rhetoric as far as I am concerned. It is time for him to deliver on his word. It is far better for the United States to talk to Iran’s leaders rather than using a war of words to treat them like demons. America cannot afford to start more wars.

Some perspective by former Iranian President Mohammad Khatami (1997-2005)

Former President Mohammad Khatami in an interview in 2009 mentioned that he believes that while having Obama as President of the United States is a change he said that he believes that America should stop acting like it is a big brother.

Khatami is basically trying to say that America’s foreign policy with other countries needs to change. The US would do well to heed his advice. But such a move by the United States is extremely unlikely. The US has had a long standing relationship with Israel and that is one of the major reasons why they will continue to label Iran as the enemy because the current Iranian regime does not view Israel very favorably.

The consequences of a possible war with Iran

It is true that Iran’s current regime has been guilty of various human rights abuses but the continued use of harsh language by the United States will cause it to go nowhere good and it will not be able to restore relations with Iran. The US may have to settle with Iran having nuclear weapons because any attack on Iran by the US or Israel will lead to consequences too terrible to imagine. If Iran is attacked you can expect a very harsh response by the Shia community around the world and Iran will come out scratching and clawing like a big tiger. The US would then be eventually stuck in another unwinnable war and the damage to its economy would be even more severe than it is now. If you think the US economy is bad now, just imagine what would happen if they attacked Iran. And that would also lead to Moqtada Al-Sadr the most powerful Shiite politician in Iraq getting involved in the resistance to US forces. Iraq which is a majority Shiite nation would not welcome an attack on Iran by the US or Israel.

Yes, Iran’s current regime is far from perfect but the United States government is corrupt too. It is time for both sides to have honest, meaningful dialogue with each other. The US will be better off by trying to do this. Another point to consider is that even if and when the current regime changes, there will be no true democracy because people in that part of the world do not know what a true democracy is.

The United States may have no choice but to be comfortable with a regime having nuclear technology. No amount of threats or coercion will prevent Iran from enriching uranium. This hard line approach by the United States will make it more likely that Iran will develop nuclear technology. The only wise solution to this dispute is for the US to have a dialogue with Iran. Speaking of dialogue, in spite of Vice president Joe Biden saying that the US would consider having direct talks with the Iranians, Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei immediately turned down the offer saying that direct talks would not help to solve the problem. If that is the case then what does he suggest? Khamenei is a radical hardline Islamic leader that is so convinced that his ideas are correct that he fails to keep an open mind. Khamenei has been in his current position since 1989 and even when he passes from the scene, who knows if the person that will take his place will be any better. If the hardliners in Iran reject the idea of direct talks with the United States, we can expect more of the same things to follow. But one thing is for sure: an attack on Iran would close off the Strait of Hormuz. Oil supplies would be affected, the price of oil would go way up, and the number of attacks on US targets worldwide would increase to a level not seen before by human history. Caution is advised. Will Iran and the United States ever have diplomatic relations again? In this writer’s opinion, as long as Iran’s hardliners are still in power, reconciliation is extremely unlikely. Dialogue is the better option instead of using military force to either prevent Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon or to change the country’s regime.

How the Iran Deal will cut off the country's ability to produce a nuclear bomb

Source

The Nuclear Deal with Iran: a few specific details

UPDATE: it is now April 2016 and a nuclear deal with Iran has been reached. On January 16, 2016, there has been verification by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) that Iran has completed the steps necessary that ensures their nuclear program is and remains exclusively peaceful (The White House). Iran also has contributed to this process by doing two major things: first of all, since October 2015, they have shipped 25,000 pounds of enriched uranium out of the country. And second of all, they have dismantled and removed two-thirds of the centrifuges (The White House). Iran has agreed to allow inspection of sites that the IAEA inspectors have determined to be dangerous. It is also said that for the next 15 years, Iran will have 24 days with which to comply with demands from the IAEA for an access request. Any refusal by Iran will result in a ruling by an eight member Joint Commission. This includes Iran. A majority vote by this commission will be enough and sanctions may be re-imposed (BBC News).

References

BBC News. 16 January 2016. 14 April 2016.

The White House. 14 April 2016. 14 April 2016.

The Iran Nuclear Deal explained in less than 2 minutes

Comments

    0 of 8192 characters used
    Post Comment

    No comments yet.