President Hassan Rouhani's Nuclear Damage

And later I will discuss the new president’s, Hassan Rouhani, challenges and what he has already done.

The article, written by David Sanger and Michael Gordon from The New York Times on August 23, highlights main controversies about Iran-US nuclear agreement. After months of negotiations between USA and Iran, the deal is waiting to be approved by Congress. However, there are many points of debate regarding the approval of this pact. The main point of polemic is the capacity of Iran to produce nuclear weapons after 15 years, when the agreement is supposed to end. Many people, like the Democrat Representative Adam B. Schiff from California, agree Iran would “have a highly modern and internationally legitimized enrichment capability” (Gordon & Sanger, 2015). Others argue in favor of the agreement because, as R. Nicholas Burns, undersecretary of

Throughout the 19th and 20th century Iran saw not only the changing of three regimes, but also the coming, and going of classical imperialists in Britain and Russia, but also late comers to the game in the United States. In each instance however, Iran was on a road to appeasement. In some instances such as with the Qajar’s, Iran’s Imperial family was trying to get more money for the betterment of itself. In the event of the Pahlavi’s, Iran was trying to modernize based off of a western model of success. In both instances the carving out of resources was involved in which Iran stood to lose the most by giving up very lucrative state industries to

However, this return to a normal state may be transitory and false. The initial quick response of the media and government may demonstrate recovery and mitigation has been completed, but this does not account for long term consequences. Surprises often elicit consequences that are long-term, chronic, and often damaging to the local economics, the environment, and human health. Often times recovery efforts are short term, but the consequences of the surprise are long term and negative effects may not be immediate (Mitchell, 1996). These mismatched recovery efforts are concerning, and must be

Iran has posed a prominent threat against the United States for decades, and after their long strenuous ordeal, a controversial, yet tolerable agreement has been committed. To many, this compromise is anything but beneficial given its short timeframe, but others are greatly relieved with such an agreement altogether. This article is truly eye opening and personally helped me form a better perspective of an important ordeal in the world. Given the seriousness of the issue at hand, it is a read that keeps the reader informed and engrossed throughout every line. The author effectively connected emotionally to the audience, used diction, and listed many facts, that each were incorporated throughout the article in order to enhance the article’s persuasive

Mohaddesa, Kamiar, and Hashem Pesaran. "One Hundred Years of Oil Income and the Iranian Economy: A Curse or a Blessing?" (2013): University of Cambridge. Web. .

It was not until the post-revolutionary period between the years of 1980-1988 that Iranian civil society started to change. A revolutionary state was looking to change the state and contain the power that was already within the government. Under Hashemi Rafsanani’s presidency (1989-1997) Iranian economic and social life underwent important structural changes. The new

The 2009 Iranian presidential election and its aftermath is characterized by a strange power dynamic between Ayatollah Khamenei's and the people where Khamenei is constantly testing their reaction to his dictatorial action, seeing what he can get away with. After choosing the president with no regard for the votes and levying threats at anyone who protested, Khamanei listened to what the opposition has to say, allowing them to voice their opinion in many circumstances. This pattern in Khamenei's action seems to reoccur in the elections' aftermath, creating a cycle in which he carries out an outrageously repressive action, and then is attentive to the people dissent towards it. This constant pushing and pulling dynamic

Tensions between Iran and other major world powers, such as the United States, Great Britain, and France, have been running high ever since the Iranians began investing in nuclear weaponry back in the 1990’s. The global community has attempted to force Iran to stop its production of such weapons with economic sanctions. These sanctions have crippled Iran’s economy but have not stopped the manufacturing of nuclear weapons. The nuclear proliferation in Iran is not necessarily a threat to US society rather it is a threat to an ideal held by the US and other nations. By having nuclear weapons, Iran has the capability to destroy any nation it chooses. This kind of power paired with the track record of support for past militant groups, has caused Iran to be an issue. The Iran Nuclear Deal will help to solve the issue but has a few faults when outlining exactly how this deal will stay in tact for fifteen years without Iran reneging on its promises.

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

The first source which will be evaluated in depth is The Shah by Abbas Milani first published in 2011. Milani is the Hamid & Christina Moghadam Director of Iranian Studies and Adjunct Professor at the Center on Democracy at Stanford University. He is one of the founding co-directors of the Iran Democracy Project, and a research fellow at the Hoover Institution. His expertise is in U.S.-Iran relations as well as Iranian cultural, political, and security issues. Till 1986, he

When Fukushima was destroyed, alarms were raised about whether or not the food fish stocks in the Pacific would be harmed. A map was recently released of the spread of the radioactive particles since the nuclear plants demise in 2011. It was shown that the areas where North America raises salmon, oysters, and other vital food fishes were critically affected by the radioactivity. Tests were done on the fish stocks of the affected areas, and it was shown that these animals had trace amounts of Strontium in their flesh.

According to Irian’s constitution the supreme leader is responsible for the delineation and supervisor of ‘the general policy of the Islamic Republic of Iran’. Unlike the US president who takes the power of legislation and is the executive leader, in Irian it isn’t the present who has the power to make the important decisions. It is the supreme leader with the wide range of authority. The Supreme leader is seen to have the ultimate power the determine the interest of Islam and mediate between executive, legislation and judiciary. The Iranian government is to ensure that there is no single leader powerful enough on his own to pose a serious threat to the Supreme Leader’s control of the regime, and that the only groups of leaders who could do so serve exclusively at the Supreme Leader’s pleasure or are controlled by other groups the Supreme Leader selects. Whereas in America all this is down to the

The earthquake which took place on March 11, 20111 in the Tohuku District, Japan triggered a massive tsunami which eventually caused a nuclear power plant outbreak. The tsunami, 14-metres in height struck the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant, which is located in the towns of Okuma and Futaba in the Fukushima Prefecture. This resulted in loss of power to the reactors of Units 1, 2 and 3.Along with this damage, the cooling system failed to work and there were hydrogen explosions which ended in damaging the nuclear plant. The damages also include extensive release of radioactive substances into our atmosphere and our earth. This accident certainly did loads of damages to Japan and its people. There are lots of theories regarding

Commitment problem, the uncertainty of states delivering on their promises, is another topic of argument for Trump’s dissatisfaction towards the Iran Nuclear Deal. Under the Iran Nuclear Agreement Review Act (INARA), the US has to certify Iranian compliance, “‘appropriate and proportionate’ when weighted against the benefits to US national security”, every 90 days. In October 2017, it is reported that President Trump “is now expected to decertify the agreement, leaving it up to Congress to decide whether to re-impose economic sanctions on Iran” (Wilts, 2017). The statement sends a confusing signal to the world because nobody is able to understand Trump’s motives towards a deal that he has