Search results

The deal on civil nuclear cooperation between India and the United States had an immense global implication on account of its centrality to the contemporary concerns on nuclear proliferation. Much of the debate centered around four critical arguments: first, by amending US nonproliferation laws for India as an exception outside the Nonproliferation Treaty (NPT) framework, the deal would weaken the fundamental goal of US nonproliferation policy – to prevent the spread of nuclear weapons beyond the five recognized nuclear weapon states (NWS) under the NPT. Second, why should other states stay in the treaty regime if a nonmember gets the benefits without much of responsibilities? Third, the problems of nuclear proliferation would multiply in the face of current challenges posed by North Korea and Iran. Lastly, the nonproliferation lobbyists were apprehensive that the US–India cooperation could prompt other suppliers, like China, to validate their nuclear cooperation with Pakistan. In view of these arguments it is important to assess whether these arguments are merely debating points or exaggerated concerns or do they hold any strong basis for contention.

Selected countries in the world have the technical capability of creating nuclear energy. Iran has striven to acquire the know-how to harness nuclear power and has been scientifically successful. However, it was sanctioned by the foremost world powers for doing so. The purpose of this paper is to analyze how the Iranian nuclear dossier came about and how it became a global issue, how it was resolved and who will benefit from its resolution.

The paper is designed to review the antecedents, to study the international community’s position, to analyze the outcomes and to make some recommendations. The study’s methodology is therefore analytical.

Access to nuclear technology is a political matter and those who are allowed to use it might be subject to the ideological preferences of those that have long had it. The holders of nuclear technology normally interact with allies to provide them with help to fulfill a nuclear power program under certain circumstances. If an individual country decides to go its own way and develop an indigenous technical capability, it will come under scrutiny and measures will be taken to control it. If those measures fail, sanctions and pressures will be employed to hamper the achievement of nuclear independence. In the absence of tangible results, negotiations will start and agreement may be reached based on the expertise of the two sides’ negotiators. A peaceful agreement could be a win-win solution if it respects the rights and responsibilities of the parties involved. Iran’s nuclear deal, if implemented properly, would be a success story and will shape future policies in the Middle East.

The first prerequisite for research is to have access to credible literature. When dealing with a new phenomenon, researchers face the challenge of not having sufficient material to develop a hypothesis or respond to all the questions that they have to pose. For Iran’s nuclear deal hundreds of articles have been written, but few books. Furthermore, because of the delicacy and confidentiality of the negotiations undertaken, one cannot interview the authorities involved either.

There are some Asian, Latin American and African countries with similar plans concerning nuclear energy. The paper will provide food for thought to evaluate the cost of their decisions and make suggestions for how they should proceed so that they can be perceived to be acting properly.

Although nuclear themes are largely political and a part of the security arena internationally, access to nuclear technology as a power source could have a significant impact on the social development of the countries pursuing nuclear energy programs. The paper studies the effect of the Iranian deal on health, education, social networks and civil society.

The author has been involved in part of the negotiating process and has, thus, been in a position to verify different information discussed in the global mass media. The subject is also a brand-new issue in international relations, since a peaceful solution was found for a scenario that had previously been solved by military intervention, without exception. Finally, it is interdisciplinary research with an innovative analysis approach.

The tumultuous relations between the Islamic Republic of Iran and the West, in particular the United States, since the 1979 revolution is climaxing in the dispute over Iran’s nuclear development. However, if as expected, a settlement is reached, mainly by Iran backing down, an important question would loom on the horizon: Can the West, and principally Washington, live happily and peacefully with a theocracy that is ideologically radical in character and anti-American in orientation? This essay deals with that question and explores pathways that may lead to some answers. In so doing it will point out the root causes of the hostility of the clerical establishment towards the United States and why despite various attempts and strong incentives a thaw in relations has eluded both capitals. Significant internal and external factors will be highlighted in this regard and how they may perceivably give (or not give) way to the resumption of diplomatic ties between Iran and the United States will be investigated.