Why Iran Should Be Monitored

Webster defines a sanction as: an action that is taken or an order that is given to force a country to obey international laws by limiting or stopping trade with that country, by

Evidence: This is why we should worry about Iran’s missiles. Just last fall Washington and European capital been involved in a long time bout with Iran nuclear diplomacy. In Washington, they hope that there hopes will run high and the effort will help the threat posed by Tehran’s atomic ambitions. The diplomatic deal is not only to limit Iran’s capability to build nuclear weapons but to also deliver to them. United states thinks that Iran is not really a threat to us but according to U.S. intelligence assessments, Iran already have the most powerful missile in the Middle East. They also have ballistic missiles that can be a

In his paper about Iran’s nuclear program, Barry R. Posen emphasized that Iran’s nuclear program may result on regional and global instability. On regional level, neighboring countries of Iran will feel threatened with Iran’s nuclear power. This situation may lead them to follow Iran’s step in developing nuclear weapons even though they do not have the capability to ensure the security of their nuclear sites. Clearly, nuclear weapons proliferation will put the Middle East in escalating dangerous situation. On global level, the U.S. and its allies are concerned that the situation in the Middle East may harm their national interests. The Middle East is still a prominent producer of oil which is the main energy resource for industrial

Even with some good alliances its problems would not be fixed until the unhealthy relations were fixed. Mendez states: “Iran today is considered a hot spot, one where the next international crisis may well be brewing.”(Mendez, 298). This shows how Iran’s bad relations get themselves into many conflicts and may ultimately lead to a worldly conflict depending on the growth of its enemies. With the rate Iranian conflicts have emerged, there will be many wars or even a worldly war by the time Iran wants to be done causing problems or

Iran and the United States are frigid bedfellows indeed. For the last thirty-seven years, these two cultures dogmatically opposed each other philosophically and theologically. To this day, the two countries monitor the other’s actions with suspicion and disdain. The United States accuses Iran’s Islamic theocracy of state sponsored terrorism and proliferation of nuclear materials with the intent of use against Israel. Iran by contrast sees the United States as an aggressive interloper driven by a lust for fossil fuel hegemony and diametrically opposed to Iran’s own national interests. Truly a match made in heaven.

As Michael Axworthy states on the back cover of his book, A History of Iran: Empire of the Mind, Iran is a “land of contradictions”. As this is true these contradictions is what makes Iran, Iran. Iran today is looked as the pinnacle of the Islamic faith in the form of a Government structure. Since 1979, Iran has been known as the Islamic Republic of Iran and Iran will continue being an Islamic Republic for centuries to come. Iran has a rich history of intellectuals and scholars. Iran is known for its vibrant culture that dates back longer than the Western Ideals were even conceived. However Axworthy asks a question about Iran and its impact on the world’s history and the current events that we see in Iran today, Axworthy asks “Is Iran an aggressive power, or a victim?” This statement is a true paradox, can Iran be the next Nazi Germany, the next Soviet Union or the next Great Islamic Caliphate or is Iran just fighting to keep its culture alive from a vast array of attacks from foreign entities and internal struggles.

Since Cs-137 is primarily a product from fission reactions, countries such as Iran must be closely monitored not only from a nuclear weapon standpoint, but also from the angle of hazardous waste control. Iran and other states with like ideologies that sponsor terror use terrorist organizations as a proxy to further their ambitions both internally and internationally (Ray, 2006, p 111). If it is ever shown that Iran, or another country, is failing to control radioactive waste products either intentionally or through lack of oversight, international actions should be swift, with options including varying levels of economic sanctions based on the severity of the issue through physical destruction of nuclear facilities via surreptitious means. The monitoring of nuclear programs in these countries must have international backing, provide zero notice prior to inspection, and have for force of law behind them rather than a simple notice of non-compliance. Since ideology is not something that can be changed with military or social pressure, preparations closer to America should take place to prevent or minimize the effect from a radiological

Throughout the years, Iran was involved in many conflicts while still today holding its own against other countries in the world. Iran is located within the Middle East with the bordering countries of Armenia, Azerbaijan, Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Turkey. As early as the period of the Romans, Iran had many types of leaders, conflicts and enemies in the world. Their government structure is similar to most countries such as the United States and Britain. The only difference they have one person that has the power over almost everything, which is the Supreme Leader. Their untrained military, imported and outdated weapons, and a small military force compared to most of the larger countries of

Iran’s government by definition is considered to be theocratic since it is ultimately controlled by a single religious leader; Ayatollah Ali Hoseini-Khamenei. Although Iran has an elected president, Hassan Rouhani, the supreme leader/ayatollah controls the military, state broadcasting services and the judicial sector. The Islamic Republic of Iran, previously known as Persia, first established diplomatic ties with the United States in 1883. Many people do not understand the importance, significance, and/or second and third order effects of U.S.-Iranian relations, although important. As mentioned in an article by Akhilesh Pillalamarri, “Iran is uniquely poised to help stabilize the region,” likely through its current circumstances and shared international interests. Therefore, the purpose of this paper is to describe the significance past and present of Iran to the United States and the second and third order effects, furthermore providing predictive analysis concerning the overall significance. Secondly, assessing and discussing how Iran impacts the Middle East in all aspects while providing analysis into the second and third order effects. Lastly, this paper will formulate a clear and concise short and long term predictive assessment on Iran, with a clear picture of the future intelligence value of the country.

and the output amount designated by the U.N. as safe. It also calls for unrestricted inspections by the International Atomic Energy Agency or IAEA on all of Iran’s nuclear sites, for use and production output.

Iranium (2011), directed by Alex Traiman, covers Iran’s evolution and relations between Iran and the United States from 1979 to 2011. The documentary discusses the possible repercussions of Iran’s development of nuclear weapons. The first critique will consider whether the featured commentators and actors were appropriate. The second critique will examine the bias of the documentary. The third critique will review the factualness and quality of the film. While the documentary was slightly one-sided, the thoroughness of analysis made for an effective and fear igniting film.

If Iran were to hand over any developed nuclear weapons information to its terrorist groups, that would cause alarm for the entire world. Extremists with the most deadly weapon ever could potentially destroy thousands, if not millions of innocent lives. This type of fear would give Iran and its terrorists an edge on the world stage. The fear of launching a nuclear attack would drastically change how the U.S. and its allies deal with Iran. To stop that, the U.S. and its allies

As Shakespeare prophesied with satirical accuracy; “Ancient grudge breaks forth to new mutiny, and civil blood makes civil hands unclean.” This ancient grudge has always been simple: The Islamic Republic of Iran wants to continue it’s peaceful nuclear program, and the rest of the world doesn’t trust them to tell the difference between ‘peaceful’ and ‘nuclear threat.’

The controversy over Iran’s stockpile of LEU and enrichment facilities has been the driving force behind the deliberations between Iran and the P-5+1 for the past 10 years. Iran claims that its program’s intentions are peaceful and that they have every right to nuclear energy. Iran continues to fight for its program and for the respect it deserves among its international peers. Iran also feels that it is being held against a standard that India, Pakistan and Israel did not face from the international community as they gained nuclear weapons (Shenna 2010, 356). While each entered the nuclear community in their own way, the international

Due to the severity and danger of nuclear weapons, it is very important for nations to have some sort of regulation with regard to the nuclear program and more specifically their nuclear weapons program. After the first nuclear bomb was created by the U.S. nations states that followed the U.S. with the creation of a nuclear bomb seek to justify their creation of the nuclear. There are many reasons why a nation state will create a nuclear bomb but the key issue here is why and how nations states should be regulated with regard to nuclear weapons development. If Iran is considered a potentially hostile regime based on the perspective of western allies it would be logical to attempt to negotiate with them so that their nuclear program can have some type of regulation rather than no regulation at all or striving to strong arm them from developing their nuclear program and possibly a nuclear weapons program.