The document discusses the potential for improved relations between the United States and Iran following the implementation of the nuclear deal in 2016. It notes that while both countries have a long history of distrust dating back to the 1953 coup in Iran and 1979 hostage crisis, the nuclear deal opens a limited opportunity for a more workmanlike relationship. However, full normalization is unlikely so long as Iran continues sponsoring terrorism and undermining human rights. If Iran chooses to develop economically and expand international contacts, there is potential over the long term for a different type of relationship to develop. The US should ensure Iran benefits from sanctions relief to incentivize compliance, while still confronting Iran's destabilizing regional activities to send a message that benefits will be limited without
The document discusses the potential for improved relations between the United States and Iran following the implementation of the nuclear deal in 2016. It notes that while both countries have a long history of distrust dating back to the 1953 coup in Iran and 1979 hostage crisis, the nuclear deal opens a limited opportunity for a more workmanlike relationship. However, full normalization is unlikely so long as Iran continues sponsoring terrorism and undermining human rights. If Iran chooses to develop economically and expand international contacts, there is potential over the long term for a different type of relationship to develop. The US should ensure Iran benefits from sanctions relief to incentivize compliance, while still confronting Iran's destabilizing regional activities to send a message that benefits will be limited without
Original Description:
By Richard Nephew and Jessica Mathews and Richard Nephew
The document discusses the potential for improved relations between the United States and Iran following the implementation of the nuclear deal in 2016. It notes that while both countries have a long history of distrust dating back to the 1953 coup in Iran and 1979 hostage crisis, the nuclear deal opens a limited opportunity for a more workmanlike relationship. However, full normalization is unlikely so long as Iran continues sponsoring terrorism and undermining human rights. If Iran chooses to develop economically and expand international contacts, there is potential over the long term for a different type of relationship to develop. The US should ensure Iran benefits from sanctions relief to incentivize compliance, while still confronting Iran's destabilizing regional activities to send a message that benefits will be limited without
The document discusses the potential for improved relations between the United States and Iran following the implementation of the nuclear deal in 2016. It notes that while both countries have a long history of distrust dating back to the 1953 coup in Iran and 1979 hostage crisis, the nuclear deal opens a limited opportunity for a more workmanlike relationship. However, full normalization is unlikely so long as Iran continues sponsoring terrorism and undermining human rights. If Iran chooses to develop economically and expand international contacts, there is potential over the long term for a different type of relationship to develop. The US should ensure Iran benefits from sanctions relief to incentivize compliance, while still confronting Iran's destabilizing regional activities to send a message that benefits will be limited without
By: Jessica Mathews and Richard Nephew Columbus, Ohio - In 2009, former U.S. diplomat Lloyd Rollins from Columbus expressed concern to the Columbus Dispatch that the U.S. and Iran are still without diplomatic relations and still quarreling over nuclear sites, weapons programs and human rights. He expressed sadness over the intractability of U.S.-Iranian disputes. But, Rollins was no ordinary retired diplomat; he was also a former hostage in Iran, one of 66 held captive in Iran during the now infamous hostage crisis of 1979-1980. Since then, Americans have had good reason to distrust Iran and see it as an enemy. Iranians also have had bad experiences with the U.S. government, such as the 1953 coup mounted by U.S. and British intelligence that toppled the popular government of Iranian Prime Minister Mossadegh in order to replace him with the Shah. Despite these ugly chapters, might the United States and Iran now have an opportunity to change their relationship, growing out of the implementation of the multilateral nuclear agreement negotiated by the US, the UK, France, Germany, Russia and China with Iran? This dealknown officially as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action or JCPOAentered fully into effect on January 16, 2016. At its core, the deal is tactical, with Iran relinquishingfor a timeits ability to pursue a destabilizing nuclear program, and the United States and other nations relinquishing for a timetheir ability to pursue regime-rattling economic sanctions. The deals structure reflects the fundamental distrust between the sides, with Irans compliance monitored by the most intrusive inspection requirements ever negotiated, and Iran retaining the option to withdraw from the deal if sanctions relief is not fulfilled. The deal is limited in scope. Only Irans nuclear program not the full range of destabilizing Iranian activities is covered in the arrangement. And while other nations party to the agreement have lifted sanctions, only a modest portion of the U.S. sanctions regime has been relieved. The comprehensive U.S. domestic embargo against trading with Iran remains as do parts of U.S. sanctions that allow our government to punish foreign banks and companies that facilitate illicit Iranian conduct. Thus far, the deal is working, with international inspectors confirming Iran has faithfully implemented its part and business now starting to go back into Iran. The deal prevents the emergence of another nuclear-armed state in a volatile region and eliminates a possible cause for war between the United States and Iran. Despite its limited scope, the JCPOA also opens the possibility of workmanlike relations on a range of issues of great importance to the United States from the future or Afghanistan to ending the civil war in Syria. But so long as Iran sponsors terrorism and undermines the human rights of its population, there will be no opportunity for systemic rapprochement with the United States. Iran is also a country in transition. Should Iran decide to develop its economy and expand its contacts with the world, there will be opportunities to develop over the long term a different type of relationship. Page 1
THE IRAN PROJECT
www.theiranproject.org Irans highly-educated young population holds far different views than those presently in charge and has a high regard for the American people even as Iranians despise the past policies and perceived disrespect of the U.S. government towards the Iranian people. The United States should continue to confront Iran and its destabilizing activities in the Middle East and beyond, in part so that Iran receives the clear message that, unless it changes its approach, the benefits of the nuclear deal will be limited and fleeting. But, the United States and the other nations who have committed to the agreement should ensure Iran receives the full economic benefit of the nuclear deal, because United States keeps its word and we should want to provide incentives for Iran to keep its word. Irans leaders will be looking for a scapegoat if their policies prevent sanctions relief from being fully utilized. Irans leaders must be held accountable to their population if they fail to capture this moment for economic development. Moreover, the US should encourage those in Iran seeking to make a new start at home and with the outside world. The United States and Iran may not be destined to be friends. But they are not required to be enemies. We have a chance now to make the relationship at least functional. We should seize it.
Collective Security Essay - Define "Collective Security". How Is This Principle Articulated in The Aims of The UN and Has That Organisation Been Successful in Achieving Those Aims?