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
among different countries. Iran has for a long time predominantly been a challenge to the American interests. Iran’s political direction could go both ways. If the government decides to stand down on their nuclear program, then Iran represents itself is not only a peaceful but responsible actor. If Iran opts to oppose American diplomatic engagement, then they become a destabilizing power in the Persian Gulf and Middle East. Either way, Iran’s stand on nuclear programs presents a direct threat for
critical review is the Nuclear-Armed Iran: A Difficult but Not Impossible Policy Problem by Barry R. Posen. The author of the article is a Professor of Political Science at MIT who serves as the Director of the MIT Security Studies Program and on top of that accomplishment, he has written two previous works, Inadvertent Escalation: Conventional War and Nuclear Risks and The Sources of the Military Doctrine. Barry Posen contributes an extensive amount of knowledge on the subject of nuclear weapons. Posen
Background In the face of uncertain developments in the Iranian nuclear program, there are two important aspects to be taken into consideration by the U.S. government. Firstly, there is substantial evidence that the Islamic Republic is on the verge of achieving break-out capability for creating a nuclear device. It is estimated that such a development could happen within the next six months. In the meantime, the election of a new, moderate President of the Islamic Republic H.E. Hassan Rouhani, whose
-economy-43-billion-102511 Myers http://www.cyberesi.com/2011/10/11/poison-ivy/ http://www.kaspersky.com/about/news/virus/2010/Kaspersky_Lab_provides_its_insights_on_Stuxnet_worm Maclean http://www.reuters.com/article/2010/09/24/security-cyber-iran-idUSLDE68N1OI20100924 Aleksandr Matrosov, Senior Virus Researcher Eugene Rodionov, Rootkit Analyst David Harley, Senior Research Fellow Juraj Malcho, Head of Virus Laboratory http://go.eset.com/us/resources/white-papers/Stuxnet_Under_the_Microscope
government, and its target was specific SCADA systems based in IRAN in attempts to stop its nuclear facilities. We should be aware of the possibility of more advanced types of cyber attacks in the near future and Stuxnet is a great example for us to prepare for future cyber conflicts. Throughout this paper, I will be covering about Stuxnet's discovery and evolution, the operation of the Stuxnet worm, events leading up and causing the Stuxnet program being created, and my personal analysis of this event.
Memoirs of the Liars Club 1. The memoir that I feel most reflects my life is Living in Tongues by Luc Sante. I was raised predominantly speaking another language, Farsi. It is also the language that I mainly speak at home considering my grandmother is visiting and it would be rude for me to speak to my other family members in English. When I first started Kindergarten, I did not know how to speak English, nor did I know how to write in it. I too, felt frustrated and somewhat alienated
political views. For example, both candidates have reaction from the Iranian government and their Nuclear weapons. So, we can determine their framing of the conflict as (US/Iranian conflict narrative frame). Clinton and Trump believed that Iran poses a major threat to Israel. Which
policy over the Iran Nuclear Deal, I will explain the goal of this foreign policy and why this current policy fails to achieve this goal. I will then suggest an alternative policy and how my alternative policy meets the United States foreign policy goal. Lastly I will discuss strength for my alternative policy, as well as two weaknesses. This American foreign policy describes the time frame in which Iran can obtain nuclear materials as well as aims to stop Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon. This
a Bad Deal With Iran”, Yuval Steinitz states that Obama has to stand by his proclamation that no deal with Iran is a fitter option than a bad deal. Steinitz claims that many experts claim that a deal with Iran should incorporate an imperfect compromise are a better option than no compromise. However, Steinitz claims that they are wrong. One argument in his article is if the U.S makes an imperfect deal with Iran, the agreement would allow Iran to pursue with their nuclear program and eventually lead
In Iran from the end of World War II to the 21 century, a lot has changed including many significant developments including the Iranian Revolution ( which changed everything in Iran), and the oil industry increased quite a bit. This made Iran a huge mark for the oil coming from the west and also coming from the soviet side, all this was made by the government to make it a better place to live no matter how tough the sacrifices that had to be done. Having to do with all the changes, is how Iran from
Iran is a nation that, due to its diabolical deeds, demands constant surveillance. Consequently, the slightest remark relating to the Iranian Nuclear Program triggers fear within the United States Government. The Program is infamous for the controversial use of nuclear facilities and research sites. David Ignatius writes in his novel, The Increment, about a clandestine effort by the United States to stop the Iranian production of weapons-grade nuclear materials. The novel commences in Tehran, Iran
The Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), also referred as the Iran Deal, is an agreement on the Iranian nuclear program between Iran and the P5+1 which includes China, Russia, France, the United States, Germany, and the United Kingdom. This deal compacts a list of actions such as significant restrictions and heavy monitoring of Iran’s nuclear program by the P5+1 and the Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) for up to 13 years. It has been about a year since the agreement was reach and there is already
Foreign Policy towards Iran Introduction: Relations between the United States and Iran have gone from bad to worse since the Islamic revolution in 1979. Iran have been considered as a member of the “Axis of Evil” and the US foreign policy towards it have been built within this perspective. However, many domestic, regional and global changes have led to the belief of a need of review of American foreign policy towards Iran. It is widespread believed that A stable relationship with Iran will alleviate the
The Islamic Republic of Iran is a country of volatile politics in the Middle East, participating in numerous minor disputes and full out wars during its history. Its participation in a bloody and indecisive war with Iraq, its sponsorship of terrorist groups such as the Hezbollah and Hamas (Bruno 2011), and its controversial election have all made international bodies raise their eyebrows in the past. However, it is Iran’s nuclear ambitions that truly captured the attention of all nations in the recent
little evidence of slowing down as the bloodshed continues. Many parties on the global scale fear that the combination of evolving technology and weaponry, and desire to harness nuclear power, is fueling the hatred that some of the countries in the area have for one another and will eventually lead to an extremely disastrous nuclear war. As a result, international global organizations, such as the United Nations, have been working to prevent such an outcome. They are attempting to relieve this tension
demands of another. In this case, the United States and the European Union, among others, have been trying to negotiate, even coerce, Iran into giving up its nuclear arms program. For the most part, Iran has not been willing to negotiate much. In fact, Iran is often described as being defiant against the world. Will this defiance cause a war to be started with Iran? The chances are good that a war could take place, but the chances are just as good that political leaders will find another way to deal
Statement What caused Iran and North Korea to implement so many human rights violations on its own citizens, having absolutely no regards for humanity? For my thesis, I plan to write about the human rights violations in two of the most restricted countries in the world – Iran and North Korea. This international component to my thesis would be how the U.S. and rest of the world react to the violations and what is being done by the international scene. I will talk about Iran and its past and present
Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, who has the final say on policy matters in Iran, assured an audience of thousands of members of the hard-line Basij paramilitary organization that the negotiators would not compromise on Iran’s main nuclear policies. “I do not interfere in the details of the talks,” Ayatollah Khamenei said in a speech in Tehran. “We will not step back one iota from our rights.” Iran’s leaders have always emphasized a set of “red lines,” vowing not to stop enrichment, which has been demanded
leader and nuclear power and was competing with the Soviet Union to create huge stockpiles of nuclear weapons. However, even though the Cold War ended, nuclear weapons are still a threat. Countries around the world strive to create nuclear power, and they do not promise to use it for peaceful purposes. Some examples of the struggles caused by nuclear weapons include the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, the Cuban Missile Crisis, and Iran’s recent nuclear weapon program. Surely, nuclear weapons