Wednesday, September 25, 2013
Diplomatic Negotiations Between US and Iran: Is there Something We're Not Seeing?
After a rocky history diplomatically between Iran and the United States, some major steps have been taken over the past several days to hopefully help these two states’ relations. In an article The Economist published on September 21st, 2013 it seems as though Iran’s new president, Hassan Rouhani has every intention to better Iran’s relations between western states such as the United States. The major source of tension between the two states is the uneasy nuclear standoff the countries have been participating in for decades. Rouhani began taking steps in the right direction by releasing 11 political prisoners on September 18th, 2013. A personal letter to President Obama and the well wishing of the Jewish New Year also marked some enthusiastic events done by President Rouhani. The condemnation of the Holocaust by the new Iranian president also left diplomats stunned (New York Times). The most prominent decision Rouhani has taken was switching the authority of Iran’s nuclear systems over from the national security council to the foreign ministry. On September 24th, 2013 Rouhani spoke at the UN General Assembly (Guardian). The United States and UN are very optimistic in Iran’s new possible diplomacy negotiations with the west, but Israel is not convinced. Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu believes that Obama’s weakness with the sanctions against Syria and permissive attitude towards Iran is sending a negative signal to Iran about its nuclear program.
As we have read in class, it would be ideal if Iran and the US could resolve their long history of hostility, but this new diplomatic situation is a great example of how states are “black boxes”. The US may only be seeing one side of Iran’s intentions, but Rouhani is the only one in the dynamic who really knows what his intentions are. Israel’s skeptical view of the sudden change of heart may actually be a wiser one. Prime Minister Netanyahu is being very bold in calling Rouhani’s bluff, but it may be a necessary judgment in the end. From Israel’s view, it can be seen that the state is experiencing an updating information problem. Receiving this new, encouraging information may not be enough to sway Israel’s stance toward Iran and its new government.
Article came from The Economist
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I believe Israel becomes too concerned about countries that they have not had a strong past with. Iran last attacked another country approximately 200 years ago and Israel still persistently engages in battles since it gained independence in 1948. Iran’s probably nuclear productivities should not be of concern at this time. We should be sanguine but keep our caution to a certain level. Hopefully Obama and Rouhani can deliberate a new relationship on better and stronger terms. We should be trustful of Iran’s actions, but also sleep with one eye open.
ReplyDeleteIt is interesting to note the difference in reception towards Mr. Rouhani's comments about "the crime the Nazis committed towards the Jews." Although American policymakers see his remarks as tentative hope for progress in relations between the two states, Iran's official state news agency claimed that CNN took the liberty of fabricating his comments. "The New York Times" claims that most Iranian civilians would have liked to see Obama and Rouhani shake hands whereas it would enrage conservative members of government. The way the media presents a story inevitably influences public opinion and can either reinforce or sway already present beliefs. As the successor of the notorious Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Rouhani's moderate stance (as presented by Western media) implies that negotiations on several contentious issues is tentatively possible. Yet Iran's media approach seems to reinforce the status.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI do believe that Obama needs to develop a good relationship with President Rouhani, but I do believe that everything takes time and that we have to focus on one issue at a time. Right now we have to focus on the current crisis in Syria and ensure that we can maintain other diplomatic relationships with other countries such as Russia. I do believe Israel tends to live in the past and have trust issues with countries such as Iran. I think the best thing for Israel to do is try to start off on a new foot and work on their own to improve their relationship with Iran, and the U.S can step in if there isn't any compromises or agreements among Iran and Israel.
ReplyDeleteI would argue that Israel is taking the correct approach to this situation. As we have read in class, in relation to bargaining, states have every incentive to deceive others in order to get what they want. There is a rather large incentive for the Iranian government to provide misleading facts to the western states, particularly the US, because of the issues pertaining to their missile attacks on Israel and alleged aid to terrorist organizations such as Al-qaeda and Hezbollah. Also, what would the incentive be for Iran to completely change their foreign policy and their views on Israel? A new president could definitely change some policies but the values of the country would remain relatively the same. For Iran to deceive the US into thinking they are completely peaceful they are taking tension off themselves after being seen in a negative light from the international community. Sure, I think it is possible that Iran is becoming more peaceful and diplomatic under the leadership of Hassan Rouhani; however, logic points toward Iran only portraying themselves as this in order to remove themselves from the negative eye of western power ultimately to stage for future action. I think the US is simply too quick to trust, and Israel is playing it safe in order to preserve their country’s existence because Iran is much more of a threat to them than Iran is to the US.
ReplyDeleteThe relationship between the U.S. and Iran seems to be leading toward a refreshing dissolve from the prior thirty years of tension. This seems to be expressed in Iranian President's Rouhani statement that, "Iran is seeking to resolve issues, not create problems. There is no issue or topic that cannot be resolved with hope, moderation, mutual respect, and rejection of violence," which was a radically different approach towards international relations compared to the prior Iranian President Ahmadinejad's comments that frequently alienated Western leaders by questioning the Holocaust and the different roles of al Qaeda on 9/11 (A10 Fassihi). Consequently, President Rouhani is a radically new leader that has already directly reached out to Washington claiming an agreement could be reached on Iran's nuclear program. More importantly, President Rouhani seems to have broad public support to help move through this transition.
ReplyDeleteAccording to the Wall Street Journal, “Iranians anxiously watched the United Nations General Assembly live on television, with many hoping their leadership would begin a diplomatic settlement between U.S. and Iran that would ease tensions and improve their lives” (A11 Fassihi). Therefore, Iranian’s internal desire for resolve should be highly considered, since it shows an effective popular support by the Iranian population. This inevitably shows Iran seeking policies where the country iss cooperating on a much more frequent basis than previously in the international system. This avoidance of conflict is extremely encouraging and expresses a country that is moving towards a more interconnected relationship with the world
Yet, this support is also extremely questionable. According to a senior Israeli diplomatic official, “we all had an easier time, ironically, with Ahmadinejad because he was so crude and so outspoken in such a base way that we could say that these guys are nuts,” which was further supported by Israel’s Prime Minster Benjamin Netanyahu’s statement that “Iran thinks that soothing words and token actions will enable it to continue on its path to the bomb” (A10 Mitnick). As a result, former Israeli foreign ministry director general, Alon Liel, expects that Netanyahu will continue “to portray Iran’s regime as little changed and emphasize the similarities between the two Iranian presidents [Ahmadinejad & Rouhani]” (A10 Mitnick). Furthermore, Rouhani’s refusal to meet with U. S. President Obama has brought forth the question about the amount of power Rouhani contains under the Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. In this case, Rouhani’s desire to cooperate with the U. S. should be carefully approached because it is unclear what Rouhani’s true desires are, although it seems that Rouhani is making a push towards international cooperation and peace.
The recent occurrences involving President Rouhani do seem quite surprising and promising for future relations between Iran and the US. A quick look at the past few decades shows quite tense relations that have rarely amounted to anything too postive for Irani- US relations. While I am not surprised that Israel may not want to believe all of this right away, I do not think that calling out a so called bluff is the correct course of action at the moment. That being said, the US should be careful not to be too quick to completely forget past relations and believe everything about Irani policy towards the US has changed. I may not be the majority in what I think but I have a hard time believing that in todays world a political leader such as Rouhani would attempt a bluff of the sorts being discussed. Wherever this new turn takes US relations with Iran will be interesting and something to follow for a while.
ReplyDelete