I.R. Liberals should not be entirely happy with the recent Iran Nuclear Deal as it is most likely going to backfire in the long run.
Many liberals have praised the deal as a milestone in the relations between Iran and the western powers. After several years of unsuccessful negotiations over Iran's nuclear program, this deal is "the best we could get", as some may argue.
At first sight, the main outlines may not even look that bad: Iran agrees to limit its nuclear capacities to a certain degree that won't allow them to build a nuclear bomb in the next few years. All their technological equipment is even going to be subject to an international monitoring program. In return, economic sanctions will be lifted, which will allow the Iranian economy to grow again.
From a liberal point of view, this deal seems to be a good example of achieving mutual benefits through cooperation on an international level. Liberalism states that this is the best way to overcome the natural state of anarchy in I.R.
Both parties seem to win - the west can rest assured that Iran won't get its hands on the nuclear bomb and Iran can finally strive to boost its economy again.
But let us take a closer look at what the deal might also imply: As soon as the sanctions are lifted, the Iranian government will be able to access billions of dollars that had thus far been locked up overseas due to financial restrictions. At the same time, the conventional weapons embargo imposed on the country will also be lifted, possibly meaning that the Iranian government will stock up on these in the very near future.
Iran has proven to be a generous supporter of various extremist and/or terrorist organizations in the Middle East such as Hamas in the Gaza strip, Hezbollah in Lebanon, Taliban in Afghanistan or the Assad regime in Syria. The regime provides both weapons and financial aid to their allies in order to expand its influence and bring terror and war to their enemies. Let us not forget that all these regimes and political groups are based on the principles of radical political Islam and the Sharia law.
A strong Iranian regime without the restraints of western sanctions will steady its status as an influential regional power in the middle east. Other radical actors associated with the regime will also benefit from this.
Let me get me back to liberal ideology once again. There are some key values of liberal thought that I did not mention in the first few paragraphs: human rights, the principles of reason and rationality and the value of progressive political beliefs. Iran and all of its allies are pretty much opposing every single one of these beliefs.
Instead, they promote a radical ideology that is going to cause a lot more problems in the future.
A true I.R. liberal should thus ask him or herself: Is this nuclear deal really true to my liberal beliefs? Or is it merely postponing some very serious problems in the middle east?
Morten,
ReplyDeleteYou are right to point out that a realist would be skeptical of any deal and that some liberal ideals may have to take a backseat to others. I guess the question becomes, do you think there are situations where some ideals (say peace) may need to trump others (human rights? Democracy?) even for a liberal? Is the world complicated enough to twist the paradigms/theories as we learned them in class?
It also might be interesting to view the Iran deal from a constructivist viewpoint. As a result of having economic sanctions lifted, Iran has an opportunity to rebuild itself. It's history has created it's identity thus far, but with an economy that will no doubt grow, and more power in the Middle East, it's identity will probably change. Like you said, Iran supports many terrorist and extremist groups, so there is a possibility that Iran's socialization will create issues with the Western world.
ReplyDeleteBy creating the Iran deal, the Obama administration did an act that they believed would bring the best consequence. This ideal is very constructivist and gives Iran the opportunity to modify it's self. How their identity changes in the future will decide their allies, and we can only hope that this deal does not negatively affect the U.S. and the rest of the world.
Morten, I am one of those people who believes that this is "the best we could get." While the Iran deal is not going to create a "kinder" Iran per say, if we do not pursue this deal, within three months Iran could produce the materials needed to produce one bomb. So while it is not physically impossible for Iran to build a nuclear bomb, it is buying us time and peace at mind. Also, could you think of a credible alternative that would be better than the one we have now? By taking a look at the science behind this deal, it really is the best option and I do not think a liberalist would be that disappointed. Both the US and Iran are countries that are seeking security and wealth. A liberal might see this as a way to actually improve relations between the US and Iran due to the fact that we are trying to alleviate anarchy and increase security for both our countries. This really is the best we can get.
ReplyDeleteAdding on to Maddie’s comment, in my point of view, it seems like this deal was our only option. You do bring up some good points showing that there are weak aspects of the deal, and that there is a possibility of a negative outcome. However, I believe that the only other alternative, besides the deal that was made, was war. And perhaps, from a realist point of view that would have been the better option. However, liberalism is very focused on the economy. A war with Iran would be very costly and it could lead to economic instability by disrupting the world economy. Furthermore the lifting of the sanctions, which is part of the deal, will have a positive effect on the international economy and this is something that liberals would like to see. Do you think that war to prevent possible actions that are not even guarantied would be the better option?
ReplyDeleteI think you made some great points with your argument here, really explaining both sides of how liberals would feel about the Iran Deal but then proving how they really shouldn't approve it. You did a really in depth analysis of how a liberal would handle this on varying levels. I personally agree more with the point of mutually benefiting through international cooperation, but also understand the risks the Iran Deal could have for global human rights. You posed some really interesting and thought-provoking questions!
ReplyDelete