Academia.edu no longer supports Internet Explorer.
To browse Academia.edu and the wider internet faster and more securely, please take a few seconds to upgrade your browser.
2019, The Jerusalem Post
The recent tensions between the United States and Iran have raised alarms and led many to forecast a growing probability of full-scale war between the two states. This article explores how nuclear weapons are being used as a card by the Islamic regime to derail and defy International pressure and criticism of its domestic repression and regional belligerence.
2021 •
ABSTRACT US- Iran relations and its bearing on nuclear arms proliferation in the Middle-East happens to be one of the major challenges of international politics, peace and security. This is because since the 1979 Iranian Revolution, the foreign policies of these two strategic states in the region (Middle-East) have been antagonistic due to the opposing roles each state seeks to play in the region and the influence of domestic politics on the foreign policy machines of both states. All these animosities have played out in major events such as; The 1953 Coup that ousted Mohammed Mossadeq, The Iranian Hostage Crisis, the Iran-Iraq War(1980-1988) etc. The 2003 discovery of hidden nuclear assets in Nantanz and Arak by Mujahedeen El Kaleq added a nuclear variant to this already problematic relationship making it a very important part of the foreign policy considerations in the Middle East region for subsequent US administrations from Bush to Trump and now Joe Biden. Despite the major ground covered by the Obama administration as a result of the landmark JCPOA (Joint Committee Plan of Action), the Trump’s regime unilateral pull-out from the nuclear plan has reincarnated old issues and feuds between USA and Iran for the current Biden administration. Using a historically backed ex-post-facto method, this research thesis probes into the tumultuous relationship between Washington and Tehran and its implications on the nuclear ambitions of other strategic nations in the region such as, Saudi Arabia, Turkey and Egypt taking into consideration the stage of their individual nuclear programs and the strategic incentives or disincentives as regards their pursuit of nuclear arms parity with a potentially nuclear armed Iran, whose uranium enrichment is currently at 60% purity. Which is way beyond JCPOA thresholds.
2016 •
Chairman King, Ranking Member Higgins, and distinguished members of the subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to testify before you this morning about the Iranian threat. In this testimony, I analyze the impact of the July 2015 nuclear agreement, formally known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), on Iran’s strategic decision-making, regional and domestic ambitions, and policy toward the United States. I specifically attempt to explain why this agreement has failed to spur a rapprochement in U.S.-Iranian relations and instead exacerbated Tehran’s hostility. The JCPOA has not changed Iran’s long-time objectives in the Middle East: regional hegemony, the contraction of U.S. forces and influence, and the subjugation of Sunni Islamic states beneath a dominant Shiite crescent. The nuclear deal in fact makes these ends more achievable, since it provides Iran with billions of dollars in sanctions relief. Despite this opportunity, the leadership in Tehran fears that the JCPOA constitutes a ruse to infiltrate its body politic and moderate its radical Islamist ideology. As a result, Iran has increased its aggression against the United States and its allies in order to demonstrate that the nuclear deal will not alter its commitment to its vision of the Islamic Revolution. As Tehran takes more destructive measures to demonstrate its Islamist bona fides, the JCPOA has also provided the Iranian regime with an opportunity to leverage the agreement as a bargaining chip in its dealings with Washington. Recognizing that the JCPOA’s preservation amounts to the Obama administration’s foremost foreign policy priority, Tehran has repeatedly threatened to withdraw from the deal in order to deter the United States from imposing any meaningful consequences for its aggression. This ploy has enabled the Islamist regime to set the terms of its relationship with America and advance its extremist agenda with relative impunity. To reverse this dynamic, the United States must adopt a paradigm shift that treats Iran’s nuclear program and non-nuclear aggression as interrelated problems that require a comprehensive strategy. It must seek to raise the costs of Tehran’s belligerence by imposing meaningful penalties for any type of Iranian misbehavior — nuclear or non-nuclear. It should make clear not only that it does not consider Iran part of the solution to the region’s problems, particularly Syria’s civil war, but also that it actively opposes its rise as a regional power. The past seven months of Iranian provocations already provide ample warning of Tehran’s malign plans in the post-nuclear deal era. Now America must act to stop them.
Advances in Politics and Economics
Looking Beyond a Nuclear-Armed Iran: The Major Implications of Nuclear Iran for the Middle EastIran has pursued nuclear weapons for over four decades. The basic reasons for this quest have remained unchanged in the face of the most crippling sanctions. Almost three and a half years after Trump’s withdrawal from the Iran Nuclear Pact (JCPOA), Tehran officially announced that it has enriched uranium up to 60%, very close to the 90% suitable for nuclear weapons. Iran is highly likely to be the world’s next nuclear state. A nuclear-armed Iran will be emboldened to accelerate its aggressive activities in the region and act against its neighbors with little fear of retribution. Moreover, Iran’s network of proxies would adopt a more confrontational approach towards Israel. Besides, Iran’s politics of threat can have serious socioeconomic consequences for Israel.Iran’s possession of nuclear weapons could arguably set off a cascade effect, encouraging other major regional powers to move in the same direction. The West, particularly the United States, would seek to offset this risk by ...
U.S. Department of State
Outlaw Regime: A Chronicle of Iran's Destructive Activities, 20202020 •
The State Department's comprehensive analysis of the threats emanating from the Iranian regime across its missile program, support for terrorism, illicit financial activities, nuclear program, human rights abuses, threat to cybersecurity, and environmental exploitation.
The motivations behind Iran’s pursuit of a weaponized nuclear capacity have long been debated. Unfortunately, this ongoing debate has never produced a document articulating such views within any academically accessible, comparative international relations theoretical framework, nor has this been done with rigorous attention to data from Iran’s history. Using a comparative theoretical framework encompassing neorealism, liberalism and social constructivism, and using evidence from Iran’s political history, I articulate the social constructivist basis upon which the Islamic Republic of Iran’s nuclear program has been, and remains, founded. I thus show that the Iranian nuclear program is expressive of the Iranian government’s desire to realign the regional power balance to make Iran the prime Muslim power in the Middle East. This article presents a coherent, comparative analysis of the motives behind Iranian nuclear proliferation over the last 35 years to reveal the correctness of social constructivism in articulating these motivations.
Given the destabilising effects of a new nuclear power, the risks of reactive proliferation and the reduction of its freedom of actions, the United States has always been concerned about nuclear proliferation and has always tried to curb the spread of nuclear weapons both among its allies and its enemies. With the end of the Cold War, the demand for nuclear weapons has seen a renewed increase. Countries previously under the Soviet nuclear umbrella or those already entangled in regional conflicts with the US, found themselves in a new precarious security situation. At the same time, the United States - as the sole remaining superpower - together with the international community, acquired the capacity to intervene and actively constrain proliferation (both militarily and diplomatically) even in hostile countries previously under Soviet influence. This evolution of the international system put proliferation and counterproliferation in a whole new dimension, centred around the complicated relations between the new proliferators, their neighbouring countries, the US and the other Great Powers of the international community. Consequently, the very interactions between these actors’ conflicting domestic politics and geopolitical interests became crucial. This work analyses the evolution of the Iranian and North Korean nuclear programs, two countries traditionally hostile toward the United States, and the various counterproliferation strategies that the different American administrations have implemented, since the end of the Cold War to constrain them. The main focus will be on the Obama presidency in order to understand the reasons that motivated two opposite counterproliferation strategies toward the two regimes and to compare the consequent different outcomes.
Journal of Contemporary Studies
THE MUTUAL DISTRUST AND THE PROSPECTS FOR RESTORATION OF IRAN NUCLEAR DEAL2021 •
Despite the historic distrust between Iran and United States, signing of a landmark nuclear deal emerged as a hope for regional and international stability. This deal is supported by global powers and covered by UN Security Council Resolution but the unilateral withdrawal of Trump administration and Iran's partial withdrawal raised serious concerns for all stakeholders. However, Joe Biden's election as the US president brings hope that the deal will be revived. The victory of Iranian hardliners in the Parliamentary Elections of 2020 and the success of a conservative president in 2021, presents a gloomy scenario. The paper addresses the factors responsible for mutual distrust between the two nations and how, Tehran and Washington managed to overcome it for reaching a nuclear deal? The paper looks into the future of Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action. It highlights the attempts made to halt the Iranian nuclear program and emphasizes the significance of an Iranian Nuclear Deal. The options for Iran in the nuclear context are also under discussion in the wake of a recent rapprochement between Israel and Arab States.
"Saudi Arabia, Iran and De-Escalation in the Gulf"
"KSA-Iran rivalry: an analysis of Saudi strategic calculus"2020 •
Rocznik Integracji Europejskiej
European Union and the Unites States of America the sources of Perception and Misperception to IranRome, IAI, April 2021, 6 p. (IAI Commentaries ; 21|23)
Can Negotiations and Diplomacy Break the US–Iran Impasse?The Geopolitics of Iran
Neighbors and Rivals: Iran and Great Power Diplomacy. In Francisco Jose B. S. Leandro, Carlos Branco, and Flavius Caba-Maria, eds., The Geopolitics of Iran (Singapore: Palgrave Macmillan, 2021), 17-59.2021 •
International Relations and Diplomacy
Iranian Foreign Policy During Rouhani Presidency: Perspective on Change and Continuity2016 •
Journal for Peace and Nuclear Disarmament
Building on the Iran Nuclear Deal for International Peace and SecurityRADICALIZATION DURING THE ROUHANI YEARS
RADICALIZATION DURING THE ROUHANI YEARS2021 •
Respublica Litereria
The West & the Achaemenid Dynasty RL Vol XIII No 445, MMXIX.pdfInternational Journal
“Iran and Instability in the Middle East: How Preferences Influence the Regional Order,” International Journal 63, no. 4 (Autumn 2008): 941-9642008 •
The International Spectator
Looking Beyond a Nuclear-Armed Iran: Is Regional Proliferation Inevitable?2012 •
Geopolitical, Social Security and Freedom Journal
The Iranian nuclear issue between the West and EastTony Blair Institute for Global Change
The View From Tehran, Iran’s Militia Doctrine2020 •
Antisemitism Worldwide Report
"Iran," in the annual Antisemitism Worldwide Report for 2019 and the beginning of 2020, (the Kantor Center for the Study of Contemporary European Jewry at Tel Aviv University, 2020), pp. 109-119.2019 •
Marine Corps University Press
Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps Its Foreign Policy and Foreign Legion2020 •
POST-NUCLEAR: THE FUTURE FOR IRAN IN ITS NEIGHBOURHOOD
Turkey and Iran: Preserving a lucrative partnership2017 •
Insignia: Journal of International Relations
U.S. Foreign Policy Towards Iranian Nuclear Threat from Bill Clinton to Donald Trump Administration2020 •
Russia in NATO's South: Expansionist Strategy or Defensive Posture
The Return of Russia in Afghanistan2021 •
Iranian Weapons of Mass Destruction: Doctrine, Policy and Command
Iranian Weapons of Mass Destruction: Doctrine, Policy and Command2009 •
European Parliament In Depth Analysis
State of play of EU-Iran relations and the future of the JCPOA2020 •
Digest of Middle East Studies
Saudi foreign policy doctrine post‐2011: The Iranian factor and balance of threat