Weapons of mass destruction: the American dream
‘'Those who fail to learn from history are condemned to repeat it.'' – Winston Churchill
The US - Iran relationship has never been an entirely amicable one, given the interventionism of the Americans. However, the quality of this relationship has now reached an all-time low with the US announcing its withdrawal from the Iran Nuclear Deal (2015) that was initially signed under the Obama administration, in conjunction with the other 4 permanent members of the UN Security Council -- France, the United Kingdom, Russia, China, and also Germany, known as the P5+1, plus the European Union. This deal between Iran and the P5+1 entailed that the West would remove the strict economic sanctions imposed on Iran, an in exchange Iran would cut back on its plans to develop nuclear weapons (a growing suspicion among many westerners). This was seen as a landmark deal which bolstered, or at least stabilised, diplomatic relations between East and West. The deal has been unanimously agreed upon by the other 15 UN Security Council Members, so to say that such a deal had been highly anticipated by the West is an understatement. After Trump's announcement in May of this year, the first and second round of economic sanctions has already been imposed. Iran now finds itself under great economic deterioration, which is marking the lives of millions of Iranian citizens. Increasingly pursuing its agenda in the name of the protection national interests proves that US supremacy is more damaging than ever in contemporary global developments.
When trying to grasp the bigger picture, the deal stipulates Iran to cut back on uranium enrichment, a material which can be used to fuel a nuclear bomb. The deal prohibits Iran from possessing any uranium that is more than 660 pounds, about 97% less than prior to the deal, only allowing it to possess around 3.76%. Moreover, there are also plutonium restrictions and unlimited access by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) to inspect and monitor activity on Iran's nuclear sites, with a few exceptions to non-nuclear facilities. The IAEA -an independent organisation established by the United Nations through its own international treaty- is in charge of this surveillance and reports its findings to the General Assembly and the Security Council. In return, the P5+1 has agreed to ‘'de-freeze'' 100 billion dollars worth of Iranian International Assets that were embargoed prior. This means that whilst this deal was in full effect Iran was able to sell its highly valued oil, which aided to stimulate economic growth and stabilise its economy. More specifically, the agreement also specified the US lifting its sanctions on punishing businesses who were involved in doing business with Iranian corporations, which made it easier for international firms to engage in trade and business agreements with Iranian firms, benefiting both sides in the process. Nevertheless, it seems like priorities have changed.
There was no way of hiding it: Trump detested the Iran Nuclear deal from the very beginning and resisted it from the moment when he was campaigning to become US President. Now that he finds himself in a comfortable chair, only 3 years after the signing of the deal, Trump has made it clear why he decided to withdraw the US from this seemingly very unique deal between East and West. The United States State Department has been claiming far and wide that Iran will support terrorist organisations within the Middle East, such as Hamas, Hezbollah, and Islamic Jihad in Israel. While the West thinks of these groups as terrorist organisations, Iran sees these groups as Palestinian liberation movements who have a ‘’right to self-defence’´ in Israeli occupied territory.
Moreover, Trump has been claiming that Iran has in fact not complied with the obligations that were set out in the deal. Trump has stated in his official statement during the White House Address on May 8th, his justifications on the withdrawal:
``We cannot prevent an Iranian bomb under the decaying and rotting structure of the current agreement.´´
Interestingly, there has been overwhelming evidence that Iran has in fact complied with the rules and obligations set out in the agreement. The IAEA has been closely monitoring all Iranian nuclear facilities with 24/7 camera security surveillance in order to detect any unusual activity that would link Iran with nuclear proliferation. If these inspectors have concerns or observe that Iran is developing its nuclear arsenal, they reserve the right to request access for ‘' the sole reason to verify the absence of undeclared nuclear materials and activities or activities inconsistent with the agreement.'' A recent examination published by the IAEA revealed that there was no apparent indication of Iran developing any type of nuclear weapons in any of its surveilled facilities. Moreover, the other P5 members -and Israel- have not seen any warning signs of Iran's position deviating in the process and have endorsed the IAEA report. With the IAEA publishing this indispensable evidence, it seems a peculiar step for Trump to say that the ‘'rotten'' structure of this agreement will cause Iran to misbehave during the process when the opposite has been proven to be true.
When we look at the conditions set out in the agreement, certain issues do present themselves. The ban on Iranian arms exports will be lifted in 2023, the ban on assistance to Iran's ballistic missile program will end, in addition to the US lifting its economic sanctions during the same period. Finally, in 2031, all nuclear sanctions imposed in 2015 will be eradicated. While there is some truth is reflected in Trump’s quote that, ‘'we cannot prevent a bomb'' under the agreement, in that future prospects of the agreement allow for much more leeway for Iranian nuclear proliferation to develop and gain its initial strength back, it would be quite idiotic to step out of the agreement and reinstalling the initial economic sanctions, since now it seems like a one way street for the US -- who seems to be the sole beneficiary. It would not be a crazy idea for Iran to reconsider the agreement, bearing in mind the economic incentives which have now evaporated into thin air. It is always optimal to stop the proliferation of nuclear weapons instead of dangerously inciting the opposite and letting the issue resurface. The famous saying goes, if it ain't broke, don't fix it. However, while perpetually insisting the system is broken, Trump has given no alternative how to fix this ‘'rotten'' agreement in the first place.
The fact that this element has not been considered, or at least poorly deliberated by the US, also bestows upon us the everlasting mystery of US foreign policy reasoning. With Europe and the United States finding each other continuously at a crossroads, it is in fact the Iranian citizens who now suffer the burden of this political agenda. Unemployment in Iran surged to 12.1% nationwide even before the sanctions have been implemented, and it is yet to be expected how the recent economic sanctions will upset Iran when the consequences can’t be put into perspective. Nonetheless, Iran's currency -the Rial- has suffered from unparalleled inflation, rising up to 13% ever since the US announced its exit which has made the RIal lose half its value in half a year. Fuelled by economic sentiment and political uncertainty, the streets of Tehran and other cities have been hosts to thousands of Iranian citizens outraged by the recent economic turn-downs of their country. It is a poignant depiction of how deeply entrenched US national interests have vested themselves into the Middle Eastern playing field, forcefully destabilising a vast region whose future is now, and has always been, largely dependent on one of the most volatile yet immensely influential countries in the world.
Sacrificing its integrity in the name of its national interests; it is worth inquiring whether the US can still be considered a credible negotiating partner in multilateral diplomacy. Some experts have called this withdrawal ‘'the bankruptcy of diplomacy''. This seems like an exaggeration, however, given the numerous crashes the United States found itself whilst pursuing its foreign policy objectives, this quote is not completely unfounded. While there are flaws to every agreement, it is better for everyone at the negotiating table in the long run to keep nuclear weapons from destroying our very human nature. History has sadly taught us what unprecedented damage such vigorous artillery can cause. For the world to stand by and, ironically, watch the country who has dishonoured itself on the diplomatic field by putting itself above others, and do nothing, shows us that those who are negligent to learn from their mistakes are doomed to make them again.
Bibliography
https://www.aipac.org/-/media/publications/policy-and-politics/fact-sheets/other/the-iran-nuclear-deal-expiration-dates-and-consequences.pdf
https://www.vox.com/world/2018/5/8/17328520/iran-nuclear-deal-trump-withdraw
https://nos.nl/video/2230969-waarom-de-iran-deal-zo-n-big-deal-is.html
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/obama-inspectors-access-any-site-iran-true/
https://www.thenational.ae/business/economy/explainer-the-collapse-of-the-iranian-rial-1.754707
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5xnZ_CeTqyM
Bibliography
https://www.aipac.org/-/media/publications/policy-and-politics/fact-sheets/other/the-iran-nuclear-deal-expiration-dates-and-consequences.pdf
https://www.vox.com/world/2018/5/8/17328520/iran-nuclear-deal-trump-withdraw
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran_and_state-sponsored_terrorism
https://nos.nl/video/2230969-waarom-de-iran-deal-zo-n-big-deal-is.html
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/obama-inspectors-access-any-site-iran-true/
https://www.thenational.ae/business/economy/explainer-the-collapse-of-the-iranian-rial-1.754707
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5xnZ_CeTqyM
Comments