I am a student at a major university. I am interested in Iran and America. The relationship between America and Iran has been interesting over the past couple of years. I want to see how America talks with Iran, especially with current talk of Iran's nuclear program and the future of Iranian democracy.
Freedom of speech can come in many forms. Many use their right of free speech on the Internet. Many Americans turn to blogs to express their thoughts on many different topics. This past summer, there many protesters in Iran after their presidential election. Many believed that this election was rigged. Which made me wonder, what is Iran's view of freedom of speech, of assembly, and of the press? This also made me think...what are blogs like in Iran? In Iran's constitution it states the following:
Article 24 [Freedom of the Press]
Publications and the press have freedom of expression except when it is detrimental to the fundamental principles of Islam or the rights of the public. The details of this exception will be specified by law.
Also in Iran's constitution it has details about freedom of assembly.
Article 27 [Freedom of Assembly]
Public gatherings and marches may be freely held, provided arms are not carried and that they are not detrimental to the fundamental principles of Islam.
Although in Iran's constitution backs freedom of the press and freedom of assembly, there have been many people who were arrested for protesting about the Iranian presidential election. There were many bloggers in Iran who blogged about the protests. There are many blogs in Iran, even though many are blocked by government filters. For some more background information, I went on the New York Times blog The Lede, which interviewed an Iranian blogger named Mojtaba Saminejad. Saminejad has been arrested in 2004 and 2005 for blogging about the Iranian government. He, like so many other bloggers and journalists who covered the protests after the summer 2009 elections in Iran are fearful for their careers and lives. Just recently the supreme leader of Iran, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, stated that the continued questioning of Iran's presidential election is a crime. With the recent breaking news of Iran's Nuclear Program over shadows the protests, and the opinions regarding the protests in Iran. It is difficult for the United States to discuss with Iran about this issue. I do think the United States should hint towards Iran about our concern regarding how the Iranian government is reacting towards the protests, but I do not think that we should just totally influence and recreate a new system of government in Iran. The United States needs to support freedom of speech, and not forgot about it while current negotiations are taking place regarding Iran's nuclear program.
I have always been interested in international affairs, especially regarding foreign relations of countries. I wanted to blog about the relations of the United States and Iran, regarding Iran's nuclear program because it was always an ongoing and changing issue. I also wanted to blog about the past Iranian presidential election and the protests that came afterward, because I wanted to learn more about it. When I first started this blog I really had to dig deep into my topic. How could I have created valid without any research? I had a vague notion of what was going on, but I had no idea the sorts of details regarding this issue. While writing posts, I researched how the relationship of Iran and the US was in the past, in order to put the current relationship in perspective. I also expanded my knowledge of the United States' view on Iran's nuclear program, and how the United States reacted towards Iran's presidential election. As I expanded my knowledge of my topic, I also grew in my understanding of it and I started to think differently about these issues. I started of thinking that the dialogue between Iran and the United States holds the utmost importance, which it does, but I did not realize how complex it could be. I learned that there are always two sides of this relationship. One side is positive and constructive. This side involves talks and negotiations. The other side is negative and makes the relationship a little tense. This side involves economic sanctions. Also Iran is a country where many people think is a country that supports terrorists. Keeping in mind the different points of views that people have of Iran and also acknowledging the sides of the American and Iranian relationship, I have learned how to create an argument on the side for further talks and negotiations with Iran while realizing the other side of the issue.
UPDATE: NOVEMBER 5TH, 2009 http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5i2ocQGHwmL7ywFisav8bc_ISSnvQ Secretary of State Hilary Clinton has urged Iran to accept the IAEA nuclear proposal. There still has been no official statement from Iran regarding this plan. The United States is concerned that Iran's response may last longer than expected.
UPDATE ON IRAN'S DECISION ON NUCLEAR PROPOSAL: OCTOBER 29, 2009 http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/30/world/middleeast/30nuke.html?_r=1&ref=global-home On October 29th Iran rejected the nuclear plan to send out most of its uranium to other countries. The main purpose of this plan was to let Iran send most of its uranium, so there would not be enough uranium to enrich to a nuclear weapon. And when the other countries return the enriched uranium, it would be in the form of fuel rods, which are used for energy and are difficult to use for nuclear weapons. Iran wanted to keep the uranium they have currently and buy enriched uranium from other countries. correction (11/1/09): In this update it seems as though Iran's rejection is definite. Although many head leaders of Iran have expressed their rejection of this plan, there still has been no official public statement.
Iran said that it might accept the proposed nuclear agreement that was created during the talks with Iranian, French, American, and Russian diplomats in Vienna on October 21st. Is Iran purposely leaving everyone confused about its future plans? Is Iran trying to lengthen this in order to secretly continue its nuclear plans? Iran is schedule to give a response to the IAEA and the UN, on this plan, by tomorrow. In the deal it states that Iran should send its uranium to Russia and France in order for the uranium to be enriched 20%. But Iran wanted to purchase 20% enriched uranium from other countries. The final decision is up to The Supreme National Security Council in Iran. But what happens if Iran disagrees with the plan and does not accept it? It would be a huge setback for the future of Iran's nuclear program and the relations between Iran and the United States. The future of the relationship between Iran and the US cannot be constructive if Iran does not accept this plan. It is the concern of the United States and many other nations that Iran might be building nuclear weapons. Through this plan of Iran sending most of its uranium to other countries to be enriched, might settle some fears about the possibility of Iran having enough enriched uranium to build nuclear weapons. But does not Iran have a right to disagree with certain parts of this plan? Iran is probably thinking of the best ways that will help grow their nuclear program in order to use nuclear energy peacefully. The only problem is that there are doubts to how peaceful is the nuclear program. Countries, like the United States, doubt the peaceful purposes of this nuclear program and this also influences the diplomacy and building of a transparent and more constructive relationship with Iran. It will be interesting to see if Iran agrees with the plan. If not, then there will be more talks with Iran, lengthening this process and this could hinder the relationship that Iran and the United States were trying to build.
I have a listof blogs that I have been visiting quite frequently and I believe you should visit them too!
A World Of Power This blog discuses an array of events and actions that the United States has done in the past regarding countries around the world. This blog digs deeper into the United States' role as a superpower and how the US should act towards other countries. There are many key events and issue that this blog talks about. I think it is worth visiting this blog because it creates ideas and questions about the United States that one would never really think about. Modern Problems with the United Nations This blog covers many issues that are affecting the United Nations today. This blog is informative and gives a little bit of background in order to understand the basis of some of this issues that are in this blog. This blog is worth visiting because it gives an insight into the dealings that the United Nations is facing. If one wants to be an informed citizen, it would be helpful to know what are the current problems that the world is facing and what is the United Nations doing to solve these issues. This blog also discusses the problems within the United Nations, which many people do not think about. It is overall a very interesting blog.
Federal Government Relations with Native Americans The Federal Government Relations with Native Americans blog discusses the relationship between the Native Americans, especially about the Seminole and Huran tribes, and how the Federal Government has influenced these tribes. It is very interesting topic because many people do not know or would have never even thought of the economic status and how the government plays a role in these tribes. This blog is very informative and grows your understanding of Native Americans today, especially about their economy. This blog is unique.
The relationship between Iran and the US has been tense since for many years. Over time, certain events and policies towards Iran have shaped the views of the United States. In the early 1950s the US was involved in staging a coup in order to bring power back to the Sha, but this lead to a revolt against the Sha, and in 1979 Iran was formed into an Islamic Republic. Since then the way the United States is involved in Iranian affairs has changed. Since 1979, the relationship between Iran and the United States has been tense. In the early 2000s there were concerns over Iran's capabilities to enrich uranium. Also during this time Mahmoud Amadinejad was elected president in 2005 and he has been an outspoken critic of the West. Then a series of tougher sanctions and more extreme words, sanctions were put in place, but during all of this Iran and the US tried to improve the relationship by talking diplomatically. So thus creating two sides of this issue with Iran's Nuclear Program. One side is in favor of the US strengthening economic sanctions and becoming tougher on Iran. Or support more talks with Iran and the US. Then in 2009, President Amadinejad was re-elected as president and this caused many riots and protests in Iran. The United States was reluctant to become too involved in Iranian issues such as this, but this hesitation angered some people who wanted the US to be bolder and show more criticism towards Iran and how Iran was acting towards the protests. These issues created polarizing sides and in order to put an end to this there must be a willingness to look ahead. The US and Iran must now lay the foundation and then from there build the relationship with trust and respect. In order for this to become successful there must be cooperation and action on both sides. If there is no cooperation then there will not be any action or progress.
Today is the first time that IAEA inspectors have been allowed to see Iran's Nuclear site, called Fordo, in Qom. There has been much debate over this site, because it was only recently discovered. This site in Qom hold about 3,000 centrifuges that are used to refine uranium. This site is located inside a mountain, next to military missile site. Iran said that this nuclear site is protected from any possible attacks from Israel or the US. There is a sense of trust and distrust in Iran. As the United States is gradually building a positive relationship with Iran, Iran is somewhat holding back. It seems as though Iran is still unwilling to throw out the possibility that the US might attack them. This is quite distressing for the United States. If Iran is thinking that the US will attack them, then in order to build trust and respect, the United States must approach Iran peacefully. By allowing IAEA inspectors into the Fordo Nuclear Site, Iran is showing its international cooperation and willingness to gradually become transparent. But yesterday, Iran delayed its response on the plan created by the US, France, and Russia to send its uranium to Russia, to become enriched. If Iran decides to disagree with this plan, this would halt or reverse the positive negotiations that the United States has been doing with Iran. It is important for Iran to realize how much is at risk with these negotiations and inspections. It is in the United States' interest to respect Iran's right to nuclear energy, but it is not in the United States' interest to punish and create tensions with Iran.
On October 19th, Iran went to a meeting in Vienna held by the International Atomic Energy Agency with France, Russian, and US officials. Iran and the other countries discussed a plan that deals with the enrichment of Iran's uranium. In these talks the IAEA and the countries devised a plan that would allow Iran to send its uranium to be enriched to Russia, and after enriching the uranium Russia would send it to France who would convert the uranium into special fuel rods (The Times, http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/middle_east/article6888029.ece). This allows Iran to have the necessary enriched uranium for a reactor but not enough to build a nuclear weapon. Iran was expected to reply to this plan by Friday, October 23rd. Secretary of State Hilary Clinton believed that Iran should act quickly and not delay with these deals. She also hoped that these talks and future talks will improve the relationship between Iran and the United States. But recently Iran delayed its response on this proposed IAEA plan. Instead of approving this plan, Iran created its own plan. Iran proposed that it will be allowed for Iran to purchase enriched uranium from other countries. Stalling this agreement with the IAEA could hinder future talks with Iran. Is the way the United States is negotiating with Iran constructive? It is a nice start that US is open to talks with Iran, allowing a new period of engagement with Iran. But as Iran is delaying responses to its nuclear program, it is putting a strain on the US gradually building its trust with Iran. Currently, Iran is delaying plans on its nuclear program, which is making the negotiating process even longer. There needs to be a slight alteration in the US strategy on negotiations with Iran. The US cannot continue its current course of negotiations when Iran is delaying time. Being negative towards Iran will not help the current situation, but being too open towards Iran would not help the situation either.
I have been blogging for the past couple of days about the relationship between Iran and the US.I am also focusing on the two most important issues that influence this relationship and they are: Iran's Nuclear Program and how the United States should negotiate with Iran, and the issue of the protests against the past Iranian presidential elections. These two issues continue to change the way in which the United States relates discusses with Iran.
The United States and other countries have been meeting with Iran to discuss Iran’s Nuclear Program.There are many points of views regarding how the US should negotiate with Iran about its Nuclear Program.Currently the US plan is to continue talks with Iran and respect its right to nuclear energy, but this right has many responsibilities. Many Americans view Iran as a huge threat to our national security, because Iran may have the potential to create a nuclear weapon. Recently Iran has talked with the US, and other international countries, to work out the next steps in order to let the international community know if Iran is using its nuclear power for peaceful purposes. President Ahmadinajad has showed great optimism towards the upcoming talks with other countries. Recently there has been talk of imposing stricter sanctions on Iran, but many believe that being tough on Iran will not help in the long run.The struggle of this issue is whether or not the past talks will be effective in actually changing how Iran uses its Nuclear Program.
In addition to Iran’s Nuclear Program, Iran’s past presidential elections is a key issue that affects the relationship between Iran and the US. In the summer of this year, Iran held presidential elections and President Ahmadinejad was re-elected as president. Many Iranians believed that the votes were rigged in favor of Ahmadinejad. Even though there was a government ban on protests, many people went on the streets to protest. There were international outcries against the Iranian government for not allowing the protesters to protest. (The UN News centre article). The US also believed that the Iranian government should have not banned the protests, but many in the US thought that President Obama should have shown more criticism towards the Iranian government (reuters website).President Obama was somewhat hesitant because many Iranian leaders were saying that the Western countries were influencing the protests.The main point of this issue is how involved should the US be in Iran's elections?
These two issues impact the relationship that the United States has with Iran.They are constantly changing and influencing the world today.
This comes from the National Security Network, which is a website created by people who have experience with the government and these people discuss the US foreign policy and how it can relate to our National Security. This is National Security Network's opinion about the US talks with Iran. It is more pro-negotiations with Iran. It also discusses how it disagrees with the Conservative opinions on the dealings with Iran.
http://www.nsnetwork.org/node/1418
This website is from the Pew Research Center for the People and the Press which is a research organization that creates polls to see people's attitudes towards politics. Article that contains polls regarding people's positions and actions towards Iran.
http://people-press.org/report/550/
This article is from the Council of Foreign Relations. This is a very useful website about the history of Iran's nuclear program.
http://www.cfr.org/publication/16811/
This is an interview that an Indian newspaper did with Mohamed El Baradei, the head of the International Atomic Energy Agency and how he believes that have a negative and forceful tone will not help on the issue of Iran.
http://www.iaea.org/NewsCenter/Transcripts/2009/hindu031009.html
This article is from the Fars News Agency which is an Iranian News Agency. This articles talks about President Ahmadinejad's optimism for further talks about Iran's Nuclear program.
http://english.farsnews.net/newstext.php?nn=8807201290
Although just recently America and Iran improved their relationship by discussing issues about Iran's Nuclear Program, the relationship between Iran and the US is still tense. In the meeting with the US and other countries Iran agreed to allow inspectors to the nuclear facilities and Iran would ship most of its uranium to other countries so the uranium can be enriched. These are good steps to a more positive outlook on Iran, but the relationship between Iran and the US is still tense. If Iran does not responsibly follow the necessary steps for a transparent nuclear program, then the US has threatened to increase the economic sanctions on Iran. It is difficult to view Iran as peaceful and willing to to be transparent when in the past Iran has showed hostility to western nations. There must be another side of the diplomacy than just talking. The US is pressuring Iran by increasing economic sanctions. But how much would increasing sanctions impact Iran? America has placed economic sanctions on Iran since 1979 and nearly every president since then has placed more detailed sanctions again Iran. There are restrictions placed on foreign goods. If Iran decides not to follow the plans discussed regarding their nuclear program, and if the US decides to place tougher economic sanctions on Iran, then at least for a little while, there may be a move by Iran to place more transparency on their nuclear program and to increase their cooperation with US and the International community. Iran must show the US and the International community that it will do the things that need to be done regarding their nuclear program, or the US will place heavy economic sanctions. With the recent talks with Iran and the US, the relationship seems like it is progressing into a positive relationship, but it may be in reality the same.
Another topic that I was interesting in was democracy in Iran, especially relating to the past Iranian Presidential elections this year, and how America reacted or how America should continue to act on this issue. Here's a brief background history behind the structure of the Iranian government. Iran is a theocratic republic which means it is a "government subjected to religious authority." (CIA Factbook). There is a supreme leader and a president who is head of the country. The supreme leader is chosen by the Assembly of Experts which are composed of clerics. The supreme leader is chosen for life and he appoints many leaders. The president is elected by the people every four years. The president can have at two terms and a third nonexecutive term. This year, in June, President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was elected a second term. People in Iran began to protest this election because they believed that the votes were rigged and many protested. There was a huge crackdown on the protesters and many people were arrested. During this time President Obama was reluctant to strongly oppose the actions of the Iranian government. Most of the President's hesitation was the fact that some of the leaders of Iran were blaming the western countries' on starting the protests. In an interview President Obama said that "I hope that the world understands that this is not something that has to do with the outside world; this has to do with what's happening in Iran. And I think ultimately the Iranian people will obtain justice." This issue brings up a good question on how involved should America become concerning democracy in Iran? America is considered a leader in democracy and showing the world the glories of democracy. In the past we have gone into negotiations and sometimes even war in order to spread democracy around the world. I believe that it is wise to respect other countries' ways of governing, but it is important that everyone has equal rights to freedom of the press, of assembly, and of speech.
There has been knowledge throughout the world community that Iran was building nuclear facilities, but we were unsure of what was being built inside of them. Tehran has previously acknowledge that there was a plant in Natanz. But recently, on the 25th September, there was a release of information about a new uranium enrichment nuclear facility plant in Qom. There was public outrage from the international community that Iran was hiding this nuclear facility. There has been great tensions between Iran and America over this issue. Obama was willing to begin negotiations and talks about the nuclear program issue. On the 1st of October, the P5 + 1 Countries (United States, France, United Kingdom, Russia, China, and Germany) talked with Iran. These talks came after President Obama's historic leadership in the United Nations Security Council on the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. The United States does not want any countries to spread nuclear weapons. Obama called the talks with Iran a "constructive beginning." The countries discussed with Iran the need for transparency and Iran's need to responsibly meet the obligations in order to peacefully have nuclear energy. This talk was important because unlike past presidencies, this administration decided to talk about the issue of Iran's nuclear program. Talking with other countries helps to build relationships and brings about cooperation. But there also comes huge responsibilities that Iran has to make in order to prove to the world that it has peaceful intentions.
The relationship between Iran and America has been bittersweet. During the Cold War America was heavily interested in Iran. In 1953 the CIA planned and funded a coup to overthrow the Prime Minister Mohammed Mossadegh in order for the Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi rise to power. This moment in history was a turning point in American-Iranian relations. But in 1979 there was an overthrow of the shah and Iran was name as a republic lead by religious leaders. And for many days Americans were held by Iranians at the US Embassy. This put a huge strain on the relations between American and Iran. In 1980 the United States decided to break ties with Iran. And during the next couple of years there would be economic sanctions placed on Iran. Today Iran is viewed as a nation that supports terrorism. There have been many disputes as to go about discussing certain issues with Iran. There are many issues that are occurring in Iran and it is affecting how America should continue its relations with Iran. The most recent issues are democracy in Iran, especially regarding to elections, and the nuclear program regarding nuclear energy and nuclear weapons. Even now our relations with Iran are not very close. America has to go through the Embassy of Switzerland in order to communicate with Iran. In my blog I will discuss the relations between America and Iran regarding the topics of nuclear weapons and democracy and how our actions in the past and present have changed for the better or for the worse.
