Diplomatic Relations of the US and Iran - Essay Example

Name Title Subject Institution U.S-Iran relations and their Global Security Implications The U.S and Iran do not have any official diplomatic relations since 1979. Their relations were ended after the Islamic Revolution of 1979. Before 1979, there was diplomatic relations which began in the 1800s. In World War II, ties between U.S and Iran were strengthened when Iran sided with the allies making it possible to transport war material to the Russians in the Caucasian Region (Bjola, Kornprobst, 2013). With the development of the Cold War, there was a deepening of the relations between Iran and the U.S. The U.S needed the help of Iran in controlling the spread of communism on the Asian continent. In return, Iran enjoyed economic and military support and technological assistance for the exploitation of its massive oil wealth. During this time, political, cultural, economic and military relations had grown deep. However, it was during the same context that the relations between the two countries also deteriorated. Other emerging issues such as the Iran nuclear deal have contributed to the worsening of these relations over the years (Bjola, Kornprobst, 2013). Globalization enhances diplomatic relations, but it also has the capability to cause these relations to deteriorate. This paper will critically assess the problem of hostility between Iran and the United States as a problem that hinders healthy international relations and threatens global security. Background of Iran-U.S Relations Iran is anti-American in its political and social fabric. This animosity towards the U.S started several decades ago, and it is centered on opposition towards involvement of the U.S in Iran’s domestic affairs and what according to Iran is the aggression of the U.S (Bjola, Kornprobst, 2013). The 1953 coup that was orchestrated by the CIA and the UK to remove Mohammed Mossadeq from premiership in Iran is a perfect example of this. In addition, Iran claims that the U.S promotes rebellion inside Iran by funding and supporting anti-government nationalist movements. There is a lapse in maintaining efficient relations. Many countries fail to master the ability to preserve proper 21st century international relations (Bjola, Kornprobst, 2013). Iran has blamed America for funding the Kurdish Free Life Party and the Jundallah. Moreover, Iran claims that the U.S contributed to the demonstrations against the presidential elections of 2010 in Iran. On top of these grievances, Iran also raises the issue of military aggression. The U.S could have wanted its actions to pass as public diplomacy, but their lack of transparency disqualifies them from being so (Ayad & Copeland 2009). As can be seen in the claims made by Iran, there are many sources of international threats to security. They include aggressive states and cultural imperialism such as westernization (Buzan, Wæver, & Wilde, 1998). At the time of the war between Iraq and Iran from 1980 to 1988, many countries in the world stood with moderate Iraq against Iran’s radicalism. Iran has a grudge with the United States for giving chemical weapons to Iraq during the Iraq-Iran war (Bjola, Kornprobst, 2013). To make matters worse, in 1988, a U.S guided missile downed an Iranian plane flight 655 in which 290 people were killed. The closure of the embassy was a blow to the diplomatic relations between the two countries. Diplomatic relations are nurtured through a country’s diplomatic offices (Berridge, 2015). However, the United States claims that the present conduct of Iran is the cause of the tensions between the U.S and Iran. Today, what the U.S considers as a major stumbling block to its relations with Iran is the nuclear program that is underway in Iran and the support that Iran extends to international terrorists. Also, the U.S blames Iran for sponsoring terrorist groups that are involved in terrorist attacks against the U.S. A perfect example is the bombing of the United States embassy in Beirut where 60 people died (EL Baradei, 2012). During Ahmedinejad’s term in office with Bush as the president of the United States, diplomatic relations between the U.S and Iran did not improve much. Evidence of this was the Axis of Evil speech given by President Bush in 2002 in which he accused Iran of threatening international security. Due to Iran’s nuclear ambitions and support to terrorists, Bush described Iran as belonging to the axis of evil. Such a reference is seen by analysts as hindering the pursuit of peace (Bellamy, Williams, & Griffin, 2010). Threats to Global Security and International Relations It is a difficult task to find peace and security in the world without following the diplomacy route. Considering the long repeated weak attempts to have the dialogue, there is need to question why the U.S and Iran have maintained their hostilities towards each other. Their success in forging good relations would do great to global peace and security (Sending, Pouliot, Neumann, 2015). Iran has cultivated anti-Americanism to the point that it is difficult to alter the course of its foreign policy. Analysts argue that there could still be hope for a second thought, but many efforts will be needed since sustaining diplomacy is not an easy task (Constantinou, & Der derian, 2010). The founding of the Islamic Republic happened on the basis of a perception that America is hostile towards Iran. Therefore, the regime must maintain its legitimacy by perpetuating the aggression perception. The Islamic Regime can only be in power legitimately as long as there are frosty relations between the U.S and Iran. It appears that the only platform that the Islamic Regime has is hostility towards the U.S (Bjola, Kornprobst, 2013). The frosty relations between the U.S and Iran have a strong linkage to energy interests and the security of the rest of the world. Therefore, there is need for more efforts from the senior government officials in the two countries towards diplomacy. Diplomacy is a very serious issue that should not just be left to the accredited representatives of sovereign states (Mcphail, 2014). Nuclear armed regional threats have emerged in the modern world and they are among the biggest enemies of global security (Booth 2004). Iran already has in its possession conventional weapons that could be used to hit the United States and allied troops operating in the Middle East region and certain parts of the European continent. America’s influence in terms of politics, technology, and culture around the world is massive (Anholt & Hildreth, 2004). Iran sees this as America dominating the rest of the world. If Iran was to develop its nuclear weapons, the threat would significantly be escalated. Iran is one of the biggest state sponsors of terrorist activities through the operational and financial assistance to terror groups such as Hamas and Hezbollah. With this willingness to see terrorism flourish, Iran could share nuclear technology with extremists that have open hatred for the U.S, Israel, and the West (Bjola, Kornprobst, 2013). Although missiles from Iran may not reach American soil, Iran’s nuclear weapon capability can threaten the inhabitants of the United States directly. According to a 2012 prediction by the U.S Department of Defence, Iran having adequate foreign assistance can marshal the technical capability of flight testing an intercontinental ballistic missile by 2015 (EL Baradei, 2012). Analysts also raise concerns that it is possible for Iran to send a nuclear weapon to a major port in the U.S through a cargo container. Furthermore, a commission studying electromagnetic pulse attacks revealed that there would be huge damage if a single missile fitted with a nuclear warhead was launched from a ship off the coast of the U.S detonated several miles above American soil (Debrix, 2008). Iran’s aggression towards the U.S, and western powers, compounded by its nuclear weapon ability threatens close U.S allies in the Middle East. Iran’s hostility towards the United States is extended to U.S allies and interests in the Middle East region (EL Baradei, 2012). For example, the Iranian government under President Ahmedinejad voiced its desire to have Israel wiped off the face of the earth. Iran also has bad relations with Saudi Arabia which is a U.S ally. Iran has also threatened to start a war if the U.S was going to resort to a military solution to the crisis in Syria. Iran’s nuclear program has been cited as a security threat both to the security of the United States, U.S allies and that of other countries around the world (EL Baradei, 2012). Moderate U.S moderate Arab allies such as Bahrain, the UAE and Saudi Arabia and others are worried because of Iran’s aggressive foreign policy towards regional countries. They would be under a big threat if Iran was allowed to own nuclear weapons. The Middle East is a major energy producer benefitting the U.S and the rest of the world. Iran’s military position has triggered increased purchase of arms by its neighbours. There is a fear that by Iran having nuclear weapons, other countries in the Middle East would want to have nuclear weapons as well and this would be a cause for instability in the region (El Baradei, 2012). In 2007, a meeting of the International Atomic Energy and the Gulf Cooperation Council was held to discuss how to prevent nuclear proliferation (Bjola, Kornprobst, 2013).The King of Jordan once said that Egypt is considering having a nuclear program and Jordan is looking at nuclear power for energy and peaceful purposes. This is an indication that the beginning stages of nuclear programs are being covered in various countries within the region. Even if they are for peaceful programs, they increase the possibility of proliferation hence threatening regional security (El Baradei, 2012). Iran’s Islamic regime is believed to be behind the destabilization and extremism existing in the Middle East and other parts of the world. The main target of Iran’s support for terrorism may be the U.S and its interests and allies. Iran has been blamed for supporting the Islamic Jihad, and the Shiite insurgents within Iraq, claims that may interfere with smooth diplomatic relations with other countries. Innovative and dangerous strategies employed by terrorists pose a great challenge to those dealing with security (Booth 2004). Iran was behind the 1992 bombing of the Israeli Embassy and the Jewish Community Centre in 1994 in Argentina where 200 people died, and many hundreds were wounded. Iran’s leaders have on various occasions called for the destruction of Israel and have openly shown anti-semitism such as denying the Holocaust. It is also obvious that the government of Iran is supporting the president of Syria. Globalization and Diplomacy Globalization brings countries together, but it also has the potential to destroy international peace and good relations. With faster and efficient transport and communication, diplomats can meet, negotiate and arrive at agreements that can foster peace (Mcphail, 2014). Through globalization, more people are getting exposure to the cultures and practices of other people from far away geographical areas (Kaldor, 2012). The interests of the U.S in Iran are protected by Switzerland while Iran’s interests in the U.S are under the care of Pakistan. Improved communication and transportation make it possible for Iran to liaise with and support terrorist organizations. Globalisation also makes it possible for the U.S to easily establish and defend its interests in the Middle East, a gesture that may be seen by Iran as aggression and global hegemony (Debrix, 2008). Conclusion This paper has discussed the effect of the bad U.S-Iran relations on global peace and diplomacy. The U.S and Iran have had diplomatic issues with each other since the 1979 Revolution in Iran which led to the closure of the U.S embassy in the country. A deterioration of relations between these two countries means that the transportation of products through the Strait can be disrupted by Iran as a way of punishing the U.S, causing a global energy crisis. With globalization on the rise, diplomatic relations can be improved, but global security is threatened even more. Globalization brings people closer together both for good and bad courses. All efforts must be made to ensure that diplomacy thrives above any other means of solving disputes. This is the only way that security and international peace will be achieved. Bibliography Anholt, S., Hildreth, J., 2004. Brand America: the mother of all brands. Cyan. Ayad, N., Copeland, D., 2009. Strategic public diplomacy: shaping the future of international relations. The Diplomatic Academy of London Press. Bellamy, A.J., Williams, P., Griffin, S., 2010. Understanding peacekeeping. 2nd. Polity. Berridge, G., 2015. Diplomacy: theory and practice. 5th. Palgrave Macmillan. Bjola, C., Kornprobst, M., 2013. Understanding international diplomacy: theory, practice and ethics. Routledge. Booth, K., 2004. Critical security studies and world politics. Lynne Rienner. Buzan, B., Wæver, O., Wilde, J. de., 1998. Security: a new framework for analysis. Lynne Rienner Pub. Cho, H., 2013. International sporting events, nationalism and sport diplomacy [thesis]. Constantinou, C.M., Der derian, J., 2010. Sustainable Diplomacies. AIAA. Debrix, F.,2008. Tabloid terror: war, culture, and geopolitics. Routledge. EL Baradei, M., 2012. The age of deception: nuclear diplomacy in treacherous times. Bloomsbury. Kaldor, M., 2012. New and old wars: organized violence in a global era. 3rd. Polity. Mcphail, T.L., 2014. Global communication: theories, stakeholders, and trends. 4th. Wiley Blackwell. Sending, O.J., Pouliot, V., Neumann, I., 2015. Diplomacy and the making of world politics.Cambridge University Press. Read More

Today, what the U.S considers as a major stumbling block to its relations with Iran is the nuclear program that is underway in Iran and the support that Iran extends to international terrorists. Also, the U.S blames Iran for sponsoring terrorist groups that are involved in terrorist attacks against the U.S. A perfect example is the bombing of the United States embassy in Beirut where 60 people died (EL Baradei, 2012). During Ahmedinejad’s term in office with Bush as the president of the United States, diplomatic relations between the U.

S and Iran did not improve much. Evidence of this was the Axis of Evil speech given by President Bush in 2002 in which he accused Iran of threatening international security. Due to Iran’s nuclear ambitions and support to terrorists, Bush described Iran as belonging to the axis of evil. Such a reference is seen by analysts as hindering the pursuit of peace (Bellamy, Williams, & Griffin, 2010). Threats to Global Security and International Relations It is a difficult task to find peace and security in the world without following the diplomacy route.

Considering the long repeated weak attempts to have the dialogue, there is need to question why the U.S and Iran have maintained their hostilities towards each other. Their success in forging good relations would do great to global peace and security (Sending, Pouliot, Neumann, 2015). Iran has cultivated anti-Americanism to the point that it is difficult to alter the course of its foreign policy. Analysts argue that there could still be hope for a second thought, but many efforts will be needed since sustaining diplomacy is not an easy task (Constantinou, & Der derian, 2010).

The founding of the Islamic Republic happened on the basis of a perception that America is hostile towards Iran. Therefore, the regime must maintain its legitimacy by perpetuating the aggression perception. The Islamic Regime can only be in power legitimately as long as there are frosty relations between the U.S and Iran. It appears that the only platform that the Islamic Regime has is hostility towards the U.S (Bjola, Kornprobst, 2013). The frosty relations between the U.S and Iran have a strong linkage to energy interests and the security of the rest of the world.

Therefore, there is need for more efforts from the senior government officials in the two countries towards diplomacy. Diplomacy is a very serious issue that should not just be left to the accredited representatives of sovereign states (Mcphail, 2014). Nuclear armed regional threats have emerged in the modern world and they are among the biggest enemies of global security (Booth 2004). Iran already has in its possession conventional weapons that could be used to hit the United States and allied troops operating in the Middle East region and certain parts of the European continent.

America’s influence in terms of politics, technology, and culture around the world is massive (Anholt & Hildreth, 2004). Iran sees this as America dominating the rest of the world. If Iran was to develop its nuclear weapons, the threat would significantly be escalated. Iran is one of the biggest state sponsors of terrorist activities through the operational and financial assistance to terror groups such as Hamas and Hezbollah. With this willingness to see terrorism flourish, Iran could share nuclear technology with extremists that have open hatred for the U.

S, Israel, and the West (Bjola, Kornprobst, 2013). Although missiles from Iran may not reach American soil, Iran’s nuclear weapon capability can threaten the inhabitants of the United States directly. According to a 2012 prediction by the U.S Department of Defence, Iran having adequate foreign assistance can marshal the technical capability of flight testing an intercontinental ballistic missile by 2015 (EL Baradei, 2012). Analysts also raise concerns that it is possible for Iran to send a nuclear weapon to a major port in the U.

S through a cargo container. Furthermore, a commission studying electromagnetic pulse attacks revealed that there would be huge damage if a single missile fitted with a nuclear warhead was launched from a ship off the coast of the U.

Read More