Iran Case Study

Saudi Arabia and Iran are two countries that sit on opposite sides of the Sunni/Shiite divide, which can be argued as being the most prominent issue the Middle East faces today. Saudi Arabia is predominantly known to be a Sunni state, while Iran is largely inhabited by Shia Muslims. Both countries aspire to be the hegemonic powers of the region. Ethnically, Iran is known to be a Persian land, unlike Saudi Arabia that is known to be in the heart of the Arab world. These two countries are separated by the Arabian Gulf and throughout the twentieth century and up until today, the relationship between the two countries has been notoriously contentious. Within the past few years especially relationships between the two states have been very fragile with Saudi Arabia ending diplomatic ties early in 2016. The two states are strained over many issues of which are, interpretations of Islam, oil export policy and hegemonic regional leadership.

The Iranian nuclear deal and sanctions is a very convoluted and confusing dilemma. Thomas Friedman a foreign affairs, globalization and technology correspondent for The New York Times, wrote the article titled, “Look Before Leaping” in which he writes about the basic ins and outs of the Iranian nuclear deal. He discusses the most probable possibilities of the deal going into depth about the likelihood that Iran is a potential economic and social ally in the sense that “Iran is a real country and civilization, with competitive (yet restricted) elections, educated women and a powerful military. Patching up the US-Iran relationship could enable America to better manage and balance the Sunni Taliban in Afghanistan, and counterbalance the Sunni jihadists, like those in the Islamic State, or ISIS, now controlling chunks of Iraq and Syria” (Friedman). He also goes into the possibility that Iran could, once the nuclear sanctions are lifted, attack Israel and lead not only the region, but also the globe into absolute and complete disarray. The complexities of this issue stem all the way back to 1979, when Iran revolted against its Shah and transitioned to “its ayatollahs and Revolutionary Guard Corps — to gradually move Iran from being a revolutionary state to a normal one” (Friedman). For far too long Iran has been involved in

This article is of interest to me because it is important subject of argument in politics and because it deals with a controversial pact that has the power to cause long term consequences if not dealt with carefully. The Iran deal consist in the agreement among the U.S., Iran, France, Germany, Britain, Russia and China would lift economic sanctions against Iran in exchange for Iran's agreement not to build nuclear weapons.

Whilst the discontent that the Iranian citizens felt for their government and their economic situation was a contributing factor in the outbreak of the 1979 Iranian Revolution, it was the growing Western influence in Islamic culture that was the main cause for the revolution. The Iranian/Islamic Revolution refers to the events involving the deposing of Mohammad Reza Shah Pahlavi and pro-American government, and the replacement with an anti-Western authoritarian theocracy under the leader of the revolution, the Grand Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini. The revolution was mainly supported by various leftist Islamic organizations and Iranian student movements to firstly, protest against the increasing Westernization of Iran and secondly, it was in

What would soon happen would alter the image of the president forever. Who would ever think “Contra” and “Iran” would be in the same sentence.

The Supreme Leader, President, and the Head of Expediency Council have shown cooperation to maintain the stability. The come together and place their differences aside. As stated previously, Iran’s decision making policy is lengthy and needs refining. Although genuine disputes do exist within the government, there is relative agreement for policy, especially during periods when Iran is threatened. In President George W. Bush State of the Union address in 2002, the US President referred to Iran as a rogue state and a member of the “Axis of Evil”. It is still apparent the people of Iran have a dislike accompanied with a strong distrust towards the West. In a recent special the Iranian people were pleasant to the US reporter in the streets, however; clearly stated that the US is Satan. Today the US is demanding Iran to cease their nuclear program. The future of our relationship with Iran is currently being

Does Iran's experience in the First World offer a solution to ISIS and radical Islam?

The United States has had some international issues with Middle Eastern countries in the past. It goes without saying; the most recent is the current gulf war led by George W. Bush and of course the previous gulf war led by his father George H.W. Bush. With neighboring Iran, there have been quarrels such as the Iran-Contra affair. This involved a political scandal in which Ronald Reagan's administration sold military arms to Iran. At this time they were in the midst of the Iran-Iraq War, while the United States had hostages held in Lebanon by Hezbollah. The United States hoped that Iran would influence Hezbollah to release the American hostages, but didn't. Finally, with Saudi Arabia also part of the Middle East, the United States

Iran’s nuclear program can be traced back to the 1980s when it was at war with Iraq. It sought develop a nuclear program as an anticipatory move that would defend against Saddam’s Iraq’s nuclear aspirations. Prior to the Islamic revolution of 1979, Iran’s government, which was then in favor of the US due to its alignment to US policies was developing a nuclear program, but it was annulled as a result of the revolution. The US, along with its allies, is wary of the current nuclear program in Iran. There have been many approaches to curb this threat from Iran’s nuclear program. The most recent and notable one is the Iran nuclear deal, which will inevitably prevent Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon. The main US allies who are against the Iran

Over the last few decades, there has been increasing tensions between the United States and the Islamic Republic of Iran. This could be the cause of many external as well as internal factors. Diplomacy between these two states were not always successful and as such there would often times be misunderstandings. These misunderstandings have led to a strained relationship and a lack of cooperation among key actors of these nations.

Earlier this year, when the United States (US) lifted its embargo on Iran, the issue of the troubled relationship of the US with its former ally in the Middle East resurfaced. One period particularly seemed to reflect their dispute, the 1979 Islamic revolution which propelled Ayatollah Khomeini at the head of the newly renamed Islamic Republic of Iran.

Such a position was of great influence in the Middle East what is further exacerbating the fears of Saudi Arabia about the changes is the United States’ refusal to participate more actively in the ongoing war in Syria and Yemen against its competitor, Iran. Eisenstadt states that, in the political spheres of Saudi Arabia, it is believed Shiite Iran is a rival for leadership not only in the region but in the entire Muslim world. The Saudis believe that Iran is behind most conflicts and hot spots in the Middle East. Saudi Arabia and Iran support opposite sides of the civil war in Syria and Yemen. Particularly strong in Riyadh and in the other capitals of the Arab Gulf states, there is a fear of the growing influence of Iran on its Shiite minority.

the inception of the Islamic Republic of Iran, only two clerics have led the country. The Supreme

Obamas current approach towards Nuclear Iran has the goal of “reaching a long-term diplomatic resolution that verifiably prevents Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon.” (White House, 2015, p 1) When Obama took office it was clear that he wanted a peaceful solution. When diplomacy failed, he turned to imposing strong economic sanctions. They have had strong impacts by isolating the Iranian economy. Sanctions have failed to stop Iran’s nuclear program. But they have managed to bring Iran to the negotiating table and a plan has been put forward in disarming and preventing the nuclear capabilities from developing in the coming years.

This deal has relieved some of the tension between Iran and the United States (Broad). The remaining tension between the two nations is that each country finds each other 's activity to be suspicious. US President, Barack Obama, speaks about Iran 's suspicious behavior: “Iran is a destabilizing factor in the region, threatens Israel, violates human rights at home, and supports terrorism abroad” (Naji). The United States cannot fully trust Iran, since their beliefs go against American beliefs, such as protecting Israel and human rights at home as well as trying to limit terrorism abroad. Iran 's Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, is equally wary of United States’ actions in the Middle East region and its intentions toward Iran. Despite the suspicious activity, the US is hoping Iran will be more open with coordination in the campaign against ISIL, the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant, as Iran is the only regional power willing to commit ground troops to combat them. The US wants Iran to coordinate their ground and air campaigns, respectively, to dismantle ISIL’s capabilities and hopefully end the menace it poses to the Middle East (Mohammed). Now that the two nations are able to openly communicate and since the deal is in place, they will be able to discuss more ideas such as the ISIL campaign, in the future.