International relations of the United States of America are complex with some countries. The situation may be also complicated by the opponent’s unwillingness to take up the universally accepted position in some question, or just the inability to find the compromise in difficult situations. The current problem, which has appeared between the USA and Iran, is based on different opinions about the nuclear weapon and about Iran’s production and proliferation of it. The problem is that Barak Obama does not believe in the peaceful direction of the nuclear developments and programs of Iran and wants them to close the projects of nuclear investigations, while the president of Iran does not want to follow Obama’s requirements and continue nuclear proliferation in the world.
The relations of the USA with Iran were started many years ago, but the critical point of their relations was in 1979, when Iran’s administration occupied America’s embassy in Tehran, and their relations became severed, with “mutual enmity, expressed in military confrontations, acts of sabotage and a steady stream of invective, has ripened into a broader strategic rivalry” (The tantalizing prospect of reconciliation, 2009, p.53). The recent problems again appeared with the Iranian consideration that they may have nuclear weapons. The Iranian government is sure that they are not worse than Pakistan, India or Israel, and they may have the opportunity to develop nuclear programs, which are directed on peaceful activities. The UN Security Council, with Russian and China’s support, is not so optimistic in the issue and is sure that Iran will never neglect an opportunity to create a nuclear weapon. The problem became sharp in the pre-elections time when every candidate wanted to relate his election campaign to the nuclear developments and to show that they are able to find a compromise with the USA and UN and continue the nuclear programs and the uranium enriching in their country, which is one of the main components of a bomb (The problem of Persian pride, 2009, p.15).
The question of the nuclear projects in Iran is closely connected with the elections, which took place in June 2009. Democratic processes, which become the reality in Iran, have inspired the USA, as it is seen in the reorganization signs on the East. People became freer, the signs of moderation in Iran appeared and America is delighted as it is one of the central countries in the struggle for democracy in the world. But alongside the democratic movements in Iran, the nuclear problem appeared. The country’s administration wanted to continue the nuclear projects and stressed its peaceful direction, but the Western countries do not really believe in it and provide their own arguments about their dissatisfaction with the Iranian nuclear problem. The first reason is that the West does not want to create the Iran vs the West relations, which are surely appear if Iran will develop a nuclear weapon. The second argument is Obama’s will to shift for Bush administration rhetoric and provide his own relations with the Iranian government. Furthermore, providing the world politics which is directed on the nonproliferation of nuclear power, the current state of affairs with the nuclear projects do not satisfy the American administration and the UN community in general (The race to stop Iran, 2009, p.14).
To provide the reader with a depth description of the problem solving about the nuclear programs in Iran by the American president, the period of elections should be investigated. The current situation played into Obama’s hands, as during the elections people are frustrated in some sense, and before the votes are not counted till the end and the president is not announced, people are easily inspired with some ideas. Having taken the opportunity of the elections in Iran, Barak Obama tried to create some strange situation, where people could think about their ability to express their opinion. The presidential elections were just the right moment. Having waited till the 15th of June, when the votes are not counted yet, but the President is already announced, Mr. Obama allowed himself to comment on the situation, and his comments were cool by directed on people and their own perception of the situation. As The Economist announced, the President of the USA said that he was “deeply troubled” about the current state of affairs in Iran as “it is up to Iranians to make decisions about who Iran’s leaders will be” (Meeting thuggery with coolness, 2009, p.29) but they are not listened to. Barak Obama sincerely “believes that the Iranian people and their voices should be heard and respected” (Meeting thuggery with coolness, 2009, p.29). The strategy is directed on people’s trust in Obama and his positive attitude to Iranians and when the problem of nuclear power in Iran will be pointed sharp, Iranian people will support Obama and his will to stop the proliferation of nuclear weapons in Iran.
The advantage of Barak Obama’s strategy in the current issue is that he tries to solve the problem through diplomatic issues. The negotiations are provided but the problem is that the Iranian government does not want to lose ground, and tries to ensure the Iranian citizens and administration that the possession of the nuclear weapon for them is a bad perspective. But while the negotiations are led the Iranian government continues their investigations in the nuclear field and the project’s development is continued. On the opening session of the Group 20 summit on the 25th of September this year, Barak Obama announced with the high insurance that “the United States has detailed evidence that Iran is building a secret nuclear facility hidden from weapons inspectors and accused the country of refusing to live to international responsibilities” (Fabregas & Conte, 2009, par.1). Obama is sure that Iran violates all the rules, which are provided by the Union for the benefit of the whole society and till the current state of affairs it is impossible to sleep with no worry. From Barak Obama’s speech, it was understood that he and his administration are ready to continue the negotiations and to ensure the Iranian government abandon the military idea of the nuclear usage of their projects.
The most optimistic calculations for the USA and Union show that during the year Iran will be able to create two nuclear weapons, which will be collected in Iran. But if Iran will take nuclear development as the prior strategic issue, the problem will not be solved diplomatically. Obama does not want to go into the armed conflict with Iran, but the problem is really serious and if Iran will refuse to abandon their military-directed nuclear investigations, the fundamental step will have to be provided. The problem is supported by the fact that Iran does not allow the International Atomic Energy Agency is not allowed to investigate the Iranian manufacturing and development of nuclear power (Fabregas & Conte, 2009). If the projects are not directed to the military affairs, and will only be used in peaceful activities, as the Iranian administration declares, why IAEA is not allowed to the region? The question is rhetoric and the answer is not demanded as everybody understands it for him/herself.
France is one more country that supports Barak Obama in the question of the Iranian abandoning of the nuclear developments. President Nicolas Sarkozy of France said that “everything — everything — must be put on the table. We cannot let the Iranian leaders gain time while the motors are running. If by December there is not an in-depth change by the Iranian leaders, sanctions will have to be taken” (Fabregas & Conte, 2009, p. NA). Really, while the negotiations continue, Iran’s developments in the nuclear sphere continue, and nobody knows how far these developments have come.
In conclusion, the problem of nuclear proliferation in the world is still open. The disturbance of the American government is understood as being the country of the democratic direction and the guarantee of the peaceful development of affairs in the world, it cannot allow the development of the nuclear weapon in the world by the Iranian government. The problem is not solved yet. Obama’s will to decide the problem diplomatically does not give its results and the whole world waits for the moment when Iranian violation of the peaceful world rules will be punished severely. The hope remains that Iran will give open access to the nuclear projects, which are provided in the country and the nuclear energy will be directed on the peaceful affairs.
Fabregas, L. & Conte, A. (2009). Obama demands Iran open the secret nuclear facility for inspection. (The Pittsburgh Tribune-Review (Pittsburgh, PA), p.NA.
The problem of Persian pride: Iran is unlikely to respond to overtures from Barack Obama; but it’s worth a try. (2009). The Economist, 390(8623): 15-16.
Meeting thuggery with coolness. (2009). The Economist, 391(8636): 29.
The race to stop Iran from getting the bomb is what comes. (2009). The Spectator, 310(9434): 14-15.
The tantalizing prospect of reconciliation. (2009). The Economist. 390(8624): 53-54.