propositioning a tentative argument to iran to stop further nuclear-proliferation
TRANSCRIPT
-
7/28/2019 Propositioning A Tentative Argument To Iran To Stop Further Nuclear-Proliferation
1/11
Partha P. Choudhury American Foreign Policy Process 1MLINS 6354-N LEC April 8
th2013
Propositioning A Tentative Argument To Iran To Stop
Further Nuclear-Proliferation
Executive Summary
This is a communique dispatched to the Secretary of State, John Kerry, on ways to perceive the
stand-off the US is having with the Islamic Republic of Iran. Approaching a time when it is the most
formative to pursue peace in the inception of the 2nd
term in office of President Obama, we as a nation and
as a people are being forthcoming when it comes to engaging with the Iranians regarding their history of
proliferation in a restive region known as the Middle East in order to pursue lasting peace for all
posterities and to hopefully engage with the Iranians regarding the ramifications of what their becoming a
possible nuclear state might do for this region and to effectively dissuade them from doing so using
diplomatic tact and cooperation.
Facts, Background and Analysis
From the vantage point of anyone who keeps abreast of world affairs in any nation, approaching
the issue of nuclear non-proliferation whenever Iran is considered cannot help but feel that future warfare
with Iran over the matter of nuclear capability is also mutually reinforcing, since these two phenomena go
hand in hand together. It is my objective to clearly and concisely to dedicate this paper to the topic of
recommending to Secretary of State John Kerry a manifold policy that will efficaciously deter Iran from
obtaining fissile capability in order to weaponize militarily and will have a deleterious effect on any sort
of saber-rattling from the triad of states that are mobilizing for war: the US, Iran and the state of Israel.
The beginning of the country of Iran having any sort of nuclear capability was incepted in the
1950s in a civil accord between the Iranian government and the US under the Atoms for Peace
agreement started by former President Dwight D. Eisenhower in 1957. At a time of the Cold War which
was marked by an arms-race between the United States and the Soviet Union, this program ensured the
viability of nuclear energy being harnessed for peaceful civilian purposes rather than to stockpile nuclear
-
7/28/2019 Propositioning A Tentative Argument To Iran To Stop Further Nuclear-Proliferation
2/11
Partha P. Choudhury American Foreign Policy Process 2MLINS 6354-N LEC April 8
th2013
weapons that had fissile material in them that could be directed at an enemy opponent at a time of
conflict. It is also worth noting that the Iranians have been a signatory of the Treaty On The Non-
Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, or the NPT Treaty, as of 1968. Even after the Iranian Revolution in
the late 1970s, Iran continues to state that it abides by the spirit of the treaty and that theyve allowed
themselves to be privy to most of the protocols of the IAEA, or the International Atomic Energy Agency,
and have let them tour many of the facilities that Iran contends are places where they conduct nuclear
research for peaceful purposes. With that said, one has to keep in mind that after the Iranian Revolution
in which the Shah was deposed, the American notion of the current Iranian theocratic regime being
belligerent to America is well known. But approaching that sentiment has to come with a thorough and
clear understanding of the history that the US has had Iran. There has been formidable resentment on the
behalf of the Iranian civilian population who were suffering poverty and languishing under the rule of the
Shah while he lived in leisure at the expense of the poor Iranian. Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, whose
autocratic rule ensured that a coterie of elites would be guaranteed patronage, had his grip on Iran
bolstered by the Americans who had previously deposed a very popular Prime Minister Mosaddegh for
nationalizing the oil industry. In a region that has seen its share of American influence being bandied
about and is restive at that, Iran is a country thats very mindful of its ancient history ranging from the
ancient Persians and wants to ascribe a greatness and esteem to their fatherland. Being anathema to the
Americans by way of the sanctions regimen and the cessation of talks has not yet proved tentative results
in getting a re-shuffling of the government to a democracy thats pro-American, and one has only to look
at the history of sanctions being superimposed on other countries to see that they ultimately dont work.
To begin, the Secretary has to look at a disclosure by Iranian dissidents in August of 2002 who
had publicly stated in a conference in Washington, D. C. that the Iranian government had started to
secretly proliferate nuclear enrichment at two undeclared facilities south of Tehran, namely Natanz and
Arak1 during the presidency of Khatami. In tandem with its safeguards agreement that Iran has with the
1http://www.pbs.org/frontlineworld/stories/iran403/background.html
http://www.pbs.org/frontlineworld/stories/iran403/background.htmlhttp://www.pbs.org/frontlineworld/stories/iran403/background.htmlhttp://www.pbs.org/frontlineworld/stories/iran403/background.htmlhttp://www.pbs.org/frontlineworld/stories/iran403/background.html -
7/28/2019 Propositioning A Tentative Argument To Iran To Stop Further Nuclear-Proliferation
3/11
Partha P. Choudhury American Foreign Policy Process 3MLINS 6354-N LEC April 8
th2013
IAEA, the IAEA Chief Mohamed ElBaradei cited that Iran had legally breached this agreement2 and that
they had to plausibly prove to the IAEA that their civilian nuclear energy program did not have a military
component to it. This in turn made Iran duty-bound now to disclose all of its nuclear activities to the
agency. Iranspresent failure to do this has led to the United Nations first enacting sanctions against
Tehran in 20063because of Irans breach of the IAEA board of governors agreement that Iran halt all of
its uranium enrichment. In an IAEA report published in 2011, the board of governors concluded that Iran
did indeed have a nuclear program that was seeking to enrich uranium to the point of it being fissile
ready, or enabled to the point of it being weaponized for an arsenal. It is the IAEAs contention that Iran
who was just in breach, is now openly flouting and defying several provisions of the NPT Treaty4,
specifically Articles 2 and 3, thereby justifying the US, EU, and UN sanctions. The gist of Article 2
states that any non-nuclear weapon state agrees not to accept from any source whatsoever nuclear
weaponry or explosive devices and adjures them not to acquire or manufacture such weaponry or receive
any assistance in their quest to do so. The provisions of Article 3 state that each non-nuclear weapon state
must be in accord with the IAEA for the safeguards agreement to all nuclear activities within their border
which succinctly states theyre duty-bound to always and utterly be for peaceful uses, not towards
facilitating weaponry via weapons-grade enrichment of any uranium, and Article 3 also has a provision of
the banning of exporting such technology. This in turn presents a violation of Article 4 of the NPT
Treaty, which enables nuclear-weapons-free states the right to have civilian nuclear facilities for peaceful
purposes such as for medicine and energy. And in a turn for the worse, Iran has started installing
advanced centrifuges at Natanz, according to a new report authored by the IAEA in February of 2013 5.
Now lets get to the Iranian understanding of this dilemma. Iran doesnt particularly oppose the
idea that it has breached the aforementioned protocols but contends that theyre currently in non -
compliance. What Tehran asserts is that the obligation set forth by the board of governors of the IAEA
2http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3327065.stm
3http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2006/sc8792.doc.htm
4http://www.un.org/disarmament/WMD/Nuclear/NPTtext.shtml
5http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-21537206
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3327065.stmhttp://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3327065.stmhttp://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3327065.stmhttp://www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2006/sc8792.doc.htmhttp://www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2006/sc8792.doc.htmhttp://www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2006/sc8792.doc.htmhttp://www.un.org/disarmament/WMD/Nuclear/NPTtext.shtmlhttp://www.un.org/disarmament/WMD/Nuclear/NPTtext.shtmlhttp://www.un.org/disarmament/WMD/Nuclear/NPTtext.shtmlhttp://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-21537206http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-21537206http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-21537206http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-21537206http://www.un.org/disarmament/WMD/Nuclear/NPTtext.shtmlhttp://www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2006/sc8792.doc.htmhttp://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3327065.stm -
7/28/2019 Propositioning A Tentative Argument To Iran To Stop Further Nuclear-Proliferation
4/11
Partha P. Choudhury American Foreign Policy Process 4MLINS 6354-N LEC April 8
th2013
has been unwarranted hence theres not a necessity for the sanctions mandated by the United Nations
Security Council. The safeguards agreement set forth by the IAEA, the very conduit of this organization
which ensures Iran the right to pursue nuclear activities, has been complied with. Iran maintains its own
view, the inalienable right of any sovereign nation to peaceably use nuclear technology, as being
vouched for in Article 4 of the NPT Treaty. In addition to that, the second provision of Article 4 obligates
that supplier states (or states that have a ready nuclear-capability) face an obligation to help non-nuclear
states in assisting in their pursuit of peaceful civilian nuclear technology. Furthermore, in a bit of
legalistic gymnastics, Iran concludes that the IAEA provisions and the NPT Treaty are mutually exclusive
from each other and are alternate agreements and is in the spirit of both of these accords. A total and
full-blown violation of these charters have not yet occurred by the Iranians, according to them. Citing
history, the Iranians bring to mind the South Africa, which had voluntarily gotten rid of its nuclear
arsenal, and South Korea who were found in breach of the NPT Treaty6. With both countries having good
relations with the US, the impulse to sanction them utterly by the UN, US, or the EU wasnt the first
precautionary measure. However with a country such as Iran that the US refuses to acknowledge
diplomatically, the ready impulse to question motives as to why it is that the Iranians have actively sought
to have a nuclear program in the first place and why theyre so secretive about their facilities isnt given
the discretion that the Iranians feel that they deserve. They contend that its their inherent right to do so.
Going by the analysis of a State Department Desk Officer who is able to see that the US and the
Iranians are incrementally on the precipice of a dangerous war, I assert that warfare against the Iranians
based upon the notion that they most likely are proliferating militarily would hearken to a future that none
in the US would want, and assuredly that the Iranian regime or its people dont want either. If after all,
Iran is ultimately successful in its quest for nuclear proliferation, the Mideast region of the world would
see drastic changes that might not work in the favor of the US and would even offset a war from which
there can be no retraction due to the fact that the world community as a whole is vehement when they say
6http://www.armscontrol.org/act/2010_01-02/Goldschmidt
http://www.armscontrol.org/act/2010_01-02/Goldschmidthttp://www.armscontrol.org/act/2010_01-02/Goldschmidthttp://www.armscontrol.org/act/2010_01-02/Goldschmidthttp://www.armscontrol.org/act/2010_01-02/Goldschmidt -
7/28/2019 Propositioning A Tentative Argument To Iran To Stop Further Nuclear-Proliferation
5/11
Partha P. Choudhury American Foreign Policy Process 5MLINS 6354-N LEC April 8
th2013
that they dont Iran to have a nuclear arsenal. But the process of ginning up a war is bolstered by a call to
action in a nation and theyre mostly preceded by fervent nationalism. Secretary Kerry, youve got to
make sure that there is a methodical calm with which you dictate this delicate business, as making a
decision to go to war against a nation such as Iran should be deftly avoided at all costs. Truthfully, the
American government can salvage peace with the Iranians and quite possibly procure a sort of guarantee
that Iranian subsidization of terror groups internationally that the US consider unlawful combatants, can
also not be a mainstay whenever Iranians have a stake outside of their territory. The perception and
apprehension needed for this necessitates a cold and sobering fact that with volatility in a region beset by
so many conflicts, the US cannot afford in its treasury coffers the financial capital to wage a war in the
first place. As financial markets are veering steadily towards a serious emergency, the world community
can scarcely afford to ameliorate their own situations and though the US is a country that is still
understandably sustaining itself economically, the risk of dipping into the treasury for a war would
squarely go against not only the domestic policies that the President has got in mind, but would offset
newly recovered gains that the US has painstakingly secured for itself. Since the history of modern
finance in a world economy having 34 bubbles, the 35th will most likely hinge upon a commodity that
no one can live without: food. With there being a direct correlation between food prices and fuel prices7,
upon an unnecessary war in which grand expanses of land will have been laid waste past the point of any
sort of redemption due to warfare, humanity can scarcely go to war of this scale.
Foreign Policy Recommendations
I present to Secretary Kerry four manifold forward-leaning policy suggestions designed to
maneuver around the impasse that the US is currently having with the Iranians that I earnestly hope will
procure for the US as well as the Iranians a tentative peace plan that will offset any sort of prospective
warfare between our nations. On the face of it, these four recommendations might be peace under the
guise of an armistice, however that is not at all my objective. I understand that the ultimate peace and
7http://www.imf.org/external/np/exr/faq/ffpfaqs.htm
http://www.imf.org/external/np/exr/faq/ffpfaqs.htmhttp://www.imf.org/external/np/exr/faq/ffpfaqs.htmhttp://www.imf.org/external/np/exr/faq/ffpfaqs.htmhttp://www.imf.org/external/np/exr/faq/ffpfaqs.htm -
7/28/2019 Propositioning A Tentative Argument To Iran To Stop Further Nuclear-Proliferation
6/11
Partha P. Choudhury American Foreign Policy Process 6MLINS 6354-N LEC April 8
th2013
reconciliation between the US and the Iranians might very well have different ramifications and
components to it, I believe these four policy recommendations might very well secure a peace that is
bound by integrity, honesty as well as candor between our nations. I will also make it a point to gauge
any sort of repercussions or blowback these policy suggestions might accrue. However I will be
mindful of their far-reaching benefits and will convey these suggestions in this communique that Im
dispatching to the Secretary.
Policy #1
Policy 1 is meant to be an overture to the Iranians to mend their ways and ameliorate any sort of
misconceptions that theyre conveying to the world community regarding their present nuclear capability.
Due to the Iranians being a signatory of the NPT Treaty and being privy to the IAEA inspectors, theyve
got to understand that theyve got an obligation not to proliferate. Under these contractually binding
agreements, any non-nuclear-weapons state that is actively seeking to proliferate will promptly be faced
with censure. I also understand that this is also an issue of national pride, integrity and prestige that Iran
is cultivating, hence the readiness to insist that theyre taking these measures in conjunction with their
inherent rights as a sovereign nation. However with their being bound contractually to the NPT Treaty,
complying with the spirit of the IAEA protocols and provisions is an obligation that they cannot avoid.
Though many policymakers in the US and around the world gripe at the fact that Iran has got any sort of
nuclear capability to begin with, we should not deny the Iranians the right to pursue peaceful nuclear
activities for the benefits of energy, science and medicine. What the Iranians should be doing is
complying with the IAEA as a sort of reciprocity that ensures that theyll abide by the rules of the game,
hence there should not at all be a reticence to make a full disclosure to the IAEA regarding the full
capability of Tehrans nuclear facilities. That would allow for an accounting and abiding by the compact
of the IAEA would ensure that spent fuel is not being diverted to a weapons-site and is properly disposed
of.
-
7/28/2019 Propositioning A Tentative Argument To Iran To Stop Further Nuclear-Proliferation
7/11
Partha P. Choudhury American Foreign Policy Process 7MLINS 6354-N LEC April 8
th2013
Policy #2
Hence, if theres compliance with Policy 1, Policy 2 would then ultimately defang any sort of war
posturing by our countries and render it untenable and unnecessary. In regards to the diplomatic realm,
we can at least pursue a tentative agreement to incept the normalization of relations between the US and
Iran. The grievances the US has with Iran range from their clandestine terror advocacy and Israel. We
have got to understand that no matter how much we might presently detest the notion of Iran being a
formidable country in the Mideast and in the world, the Iranians are free to exercise their rights as a
sovereign nation. In a world where there are so many cultural and anthropological differences between
nations, Iran feels justification that its conducting its activities as a state that shouldnt face censure from
the world community as well as the US. If we were to establish a dialogue between the Iranians, then that
would be a formative first-step that would dispel the conceptualization of a war from the very beginning.
I feel that the Secretary needs to keep that in mind and it is something that should be particularly
conveyed to the Iranians in a meaningful way thats genuine.
Policy #3
In an age of globalization, there can be many steps taken in order to reestablish ties with the
Iranians not only between governmental bodies but civil groups such as student and professional groups
that are the most open to a sort ofglasnostand exchange of ideas whereas the host governments might
have enmity between each other. International cultural exchanges meant to foster goodwill have often
proven formative and fruitful whenever it comes to dispelling notions of hostility whenever rival powers
are concerned. This in turn can exchange human capital allocation between our two countries for students
as well as professionals.
-
7/28/2019 Propositioning A Tentative Argument To Iran To Stop Further Nuclear-Proliferation
8/11
Partha P. Choudhury American Foreign Policy Process 8MLINS 6354-N LEC April 8
th2013
Policy #4
The world body including the US, the EU and the United Nations can start the easement of
sanctions against Iran that has crippled their economy and devalued their currency, the rial. It is evident
from history that sanctions superimposed upon countries meant to change their behavior have almost
never proven to be successful. Iran, seemingly despotic as though we may vilify the government to be, is
not a third-world nation and there is still a lot of affinity and loyalty that the Iranians have for their
national government. Though a reason for the sanctions regimen is meant to be taken as a precautionary
measure by the United Nations and the European Union to stop Iran from proliferating nuclear weapons,
the US sanctions against Iran has got to do with a nationalistic rivalry that our nations have with each
other. If we were to pursue the normalization of ties and make an overture of reciprocity of trade, this in
turn can be a formative step to get a country to change its behavior. The likelihood of trading partners
waging war against each other is not very likely as theyve both got trading interests that are mutually
symbiotic, hence warfare would be deftly avoided in just a situation. It can also mean the influx of an
influence that can usher in reforms in the country that not only the US would find beneficial but the
Iranian civil population as well. This of course lends itself to the Iranian subsidization of terror groups
such as Hezbollah and the war chattel that they send to Syrian government, which would be promptly
curtailed once the notion of peace that is lasting and just can be achieved.
Assessment of Possible Blowbacks From Aforementioned Policy Suggestions
For each of the policy objectives that Ive outlined to the Secretary, there might be repercussions
or blowbacks that could arise from implementing these policies. ForPolicy #1, a possible blowback
could be hesitation from the Iranians regarding their being candid about their nuclear activities. Though
under the specter of the world community, the government of Iran feels that it has an inherent right to
pursue nuclear activities and could readily dismiss IAEA agents who seek to monitor these facilities
where nuclear capability might be weaponized. But I feel that due to the Iranians being a signatory to the
-
7/28/2019 Propositioning A Tentative Argument To Iran To Stop Further Nuclear-Proliferation
9/11
Partha P. Choudhury American Foreign Policy Process 9MLINS 6354-N LEC April 8
th2013
NPT Treaty and being privy to the IAEA, Iran has no choice but to yield to this demand. ForPolicy #2,
not everyone between our two countries have got the same mentality towards peace as others do. Both in
the US, among conservatives and neoconservatives, and a little bellicose diatribe from President
Ahmadinejad meant to save face and the dignity of the Iranians, can lead to a war in which a leader feels
that theyve got no other choice but to wage warfare. Getting the Iranians to change their tune overnight
regarding terror groups or Israel simply is not a possibility, but by establishing a dialogue with them can
be a formative first step that can salvage peace from the onset. ForPolicy #4, the easement of sanctions
on Iran between the world community with the US might be met with conflict from domestic groups in
the US who have had it in their minds to vilify Iran and perpetuate the sanctions regimen. Another issue
to grasp is that the biggest commodity that the Iranians have is oil, and due to issues regarding the
environment and ecological groups in the US might very well want to normalize relations with the
Iranians but dont want to incrementally aid to climate change by facilitating the oil industry. These are
all possible blowbacks.
Summation
Secretary Kerry, I hope that youve been mindful of these possible solutions and alternatives and
their ramifications that Ive presented to you. The primer on the history that Iran has had with the US is
something that you are very well aware of. But Ive presented to you four forward-leaning policy
suggestions that I feel that you often dont get to hear from associates in the State Department, the White
House or your former Senate colleagues. Due to your background with the military while serving in
Vietnam, youve seen atrocities being committed and have publicly testified to their veracity. And I
know that due to your affiliation with the US government, theres no uniformity when it comes to
ideologies presented to you on a daily basis. And like you, Im insistent that the Iranians shouldnt
proliferate their nuclear capability to make an arsenal of weapons. But starting a war against a nation
whose people have expatriates in our own country and whose youthful population have an affinity for the
US, you should be able to distinguish that the belligerence of the Iranian government isnt emblematic of
-
7/28/2019 Propositioning A Tentative Argument To Iran To Stop Further Nuclear-Proliferation
10/11
Partha P. Choudhury American Foreign Policy Process 10MLINS 6354-N LEC April 8
th2013
its people. Case in point, the sham 2009 Iranian elections in which the majority of the Iranian population
was reform-minded and voted for Mousavi however got Ahmadinejad for another term. The Iranian
regime isnt wholly representative of the values of the people and I feel that youve got the diplomatic tact
to convey clearly to the Iranians the incentives not to proliferate in their nuclear facilities.
As methods of warfare are getting more refined and the amount of high casualties can be inflicted
with a touch of a button, the institution of warfare is incrementally getting more methodical and sterile.
And resolving the Iranian dilemma by means of warfare goes squarely against the assertions and
conjectures that Ive presented to you. Although theres a plurality of opinion on this matter, I sincerely
hope that youll take my advice and present the array of incentives to the Iranians and hopefully resolve it
peaceably.
-
7/28/2019 Propositioning A Tentative Argument To Iran To Stop Further Nuclear-Proliferation
11/11
Partha P. Choudhury American Foreign Policy Process 11MLINS 6354-N LEC April 8
th2013
Works Cited (American Political Science Format)
1. PBS. Background To A Crisis. 2005.http://www.pbs.org/frontlineworld/stories/iran403/background.html . Johnson, Zachary K.
2. BBC. Iran Signs Up To Nuclear Checks. 2003. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3327065.stm.3.
United Nations. Security Council Resolution 1696. 2006.http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2006/sc8792.doc.htm
4. United Nations. Treaty On The Nonproliferation Of Nuclear Weapons. 1968.http://www.un.org/disarmament/WMD/Nuclear/NPTtext.shtml
5. BBC. Iran installing new Natanz centrifuges, says IAEA. 2013.http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-21537206
6. Arms Control Association. Safeguards Noncompliance: A Challenge for the IAEA and the UN Security Council. 2010.http://www.armscontrol.org/act/2010_01-02/Goldschmidt
7. IMF. Impact of High Food and Fuel Prices on Developing CountriesFrequently Asked Questions.2012. http://www.imf.org/external/np/exr/faq/ffpfaqs.htm
http://www.pbs.org/frontlineworld/stories/iran403/background.htmlhttp://www.pbs.org/frontlineworld/stories/iran403/background.htmlhttp://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3327065.stmhttp://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3327065.stmhttp://www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2006/sc8792.doc.htmhttp://www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2006/sc8792.doc.htmhttp://www.un.org/disarmament/WMD/Nuclear/NPTtext.shtmlhttp://www.un.org/disarmament/WMD/Nuclear/NPTtext.shtmlhttp://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-21537206http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-21537206http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-21537206http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-21537206http://www.armscontrol.org/act/2010_01-02/Goldschmidthttp://www.armscontrol.org/act/2010_01-02/Goldschmidthttp://www.imf.org/external/np/exr/faq/ffpfaqs.htmhttp://www.imf.org/external/np/exr/faq/ffpfaqs.htmhttp://www.imf.org/external/np/exr/faq/ffpfaqs.htmhttp://www.armscontrol.org/act/2010_01-02/Goldschmidthttp://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-21537206http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-21537206http://www.un.org/disarmament/WMD/Nuclear/NPTtext.shtmlhttp://www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2006/sc8792.doc.htmhttp://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3327065.stmhttp://www.pbs.org/frontlineworld/stories/iran403/background.html