Iran’s mass destruction weapon capabilities cannot be overestimated, considering the events of yesteryears which had attracted an international interest on the country, and its nuclear program activities.
This issue has fuelled a serious conflict between the Arabic nation and other countries in the world. Iran’s nuclear weapon program heightened a decade ago, following the revelation of two nuclear sites in the country by an Iranian resistance group.
Following this revelation, Iran stood its ground by arguing that their nuclear program was legal, and that it was intended for no other reason, but to generate nuclear energy for its citizens.
According to Hunt (2009), Iranian leadership has always argued that the main goal behind the program was to establish a nuclear project that would supply electricity and fuel for medical reactors.
This was against the perception of some Western powers who believed that Iran’s nuclear program was associated with the production of nuclear weapons, and it therefore posed serious security threats to other countries. This was arguably one of the major reasons that would facilitate the odds that do exist between Iran and the Western world.
The Iranian government has been in prolonged differences with the United States and other major Western powers, owing to their suspected interest of acquiring nuclear weapons.
These differences and misunderstandings are likely to throw Iran in one of the most challenging times of its economic history, following heightening economic sanctions by the Western countries.
However, it is beyond doubts that these sanctions will be effective in helping Iran change its behavior in regard with the polarized nuclear program.
Economic sanctions simply refer to the act of restricting a particular country from participating in free trade with other countries, owing to their political differences or misunderstandings.
Economic sanctions are believed to have serious effects on the receiving countries, and this has increased the faith of many people on the various forms of disciplinary actions that are applied in the contemporary world to discipline those countries that have failed to comply with the international regulations.
Possession of nuclear weapons is a serious issue which could have far-reaching repercussions on a country’s economical power. In most cases, this is likely to attract a progressive economic isolation of the suspected country, thus resulting to ruined international trading relations and stalled progress of the economy.
Iran’s nuclear program has always been unclear over the years, thus raising a greater security concern across the world. The fact that their nuclear plan is likely to generate a new arms race in the whole world has led to successive rounds of debates and negotiations between the Iranian government and the international community.
There have been military threats by the U.S. and Israel against Iran, as one way of forcing the Iranian government to submit critical information regarding their nuclear facilities. This, however, has never been President Obama’s best idea of action towards the Middle East country.
As it would be observed, the President has continuously rejected the plan by citing peaceful talks as the most appropriate course of action here, since there was still room for negotiations with the Iranian government (Dobbins, 2010).
The main agenda behind these talks is to convince the Iranian government to come out clearly on the main intention of its nuclear program and facilities. However, these peaceful talks have failed to bear positive results within the expected time period of time, thus leaving economic sanctions against Iran as the only option that can be used to address the issue.
The last few decades have seen a number of sanctions against Iran by other countries, as a result of their adamant stand on the nuclear program issue. The United States, for instance, has over the years imposed a number of sanctions against Iran in regard to their nuclear activities.
These rounds of sanctions have been executed through various avenues which include trade, military, scientific and economic-related affairs.
According to Torbat (2005) these sanctions would incorporate prohibition of weapon sales to Iran by the United States, sanctions on the country’s financial institutions, and a ban on all things which the U.S. government could intend to import from Iran.
An Executive Order was once issued by President Reagan in the year 1988, prohibiting any trade relations between the U.S. and the Iranian government. Even though the Executive Order is no longer effective nowadays, most American sanctions against Iran do apply even today.
It is clear that the safety of civil aviation of Iran has been endangered as a result of the U.S. sanctions against the country, where Iranians are barred from acquiring key parts which are essential for aviation safety.
The European Union has also imposed crippling sanctions against the Iranian government in a number of approaches, as a way of coercing them to get rid of their suspicious nuclear facilities.
Some of the key areas where the European Union has established restriction boundaries with the Iranian government include the energy sector, foreign trade, insurance, and financial services, among other key areas (Tridimas & Guiterrex-Fons, 2008).
At the beginning of 2012, members of the European Union passed an oil embargo on Iran. Iran would also witness the disconnection of its banking institutions from the SWIFT in the same year. These, among other blows that followed impacted a real blow on the country’s economy.
Bilateral economic sanctions against Iran have also been witnessed in many regions across the world. In this case, various countries have come up with strategies that are intended to address the serious issue of Iran’s nuclear program.
Australia, for instance, has established restrictions for those persons and entities linked to Iran’s nuclear program, or those suspected to be assisting the Iranian government in violating sanctions that have already being set against them.
In the year 2012, India would enact a ban on the export of anything that could aid in the development of Iran’s nuclear facilities (Edelman, Krepinevich & Montgomery, 2011). Countries such as Japan and South Korea, which are known to account for a relatively higher percentage of Iranian’s oil exports, have also taken concrete sanction steps against the Iranian government.
The Japanese government has completely banned investments with the energy sector of Iran. South Korea, on the other hand, has imposed heavy economic sanctions on a large number of Iranian companies and independent bodies that are believed to have business dealings with the country’s nuclear program.
On the same note, Switzerland has established strict regulations governing the sale of war equipment and other dual-use items to the Iranian government as a way of stalling progress in the Iranian energy sector, which relies mostly on nuclear products and facilities.
Most of these sanctions have been as a result of a pressure by the international community, through the United Nations and other international bodies.
Iran’s sanction programs by the international communities have brought a number of challenges to the country’s economical structure. For instance, there has been a declining trend in the level of the country’s exports in terms of oil products, which forms the basis of the country’s major exports.
More importantly, these recurring sanctions have completely exhausted the country’s access of materials which are essential for the running of oil and energy plants. This has led to a decline in the production of oil and oil products, thus forcing many domestic and foreign investors to flee the country to other regions with promising business opportunities.
The Iranian economy is said to have fallen sharply over the last five years, and this comes as a result of the heavy sanctions imposed against the country by the international community.
As a matter of fact, these sanctions have significantly affected the development of the Iranian nuclear program, by making it hard for the Iranians to acquire nuclear equipment and materials.
After many years of ignoring the impact of these sanctions, Iranian leaders are now willing to cooperate with the international community. This comes as they acknowledge the fact that their country’s economy is almost falling apart, as a result of reduced oil production and sales in terms of exports.
In this context, there is no doubt that economic sanctions against Iran will be effective in changing the country’s behavior towards its nuclear program and facilities.
References
Dobbins, J. (2010). Negotiating with Iran: Reflections from Personal Experience. The Washington Quarterly, 33(1), 149-162.
Edelman, E., Krepinevich, A., & Montgomery, E. (2011). The Dangers of a Nuclear Iran- The Limits of Containment. Foreign Affairs, 90(12), 66-75.
Hunt, M. (2009). Ideology and US foreign policy. United Kingdom: Yale University Press.
Torbat, A. (2005). Impacts of the US trade and financial sanctions on Iran. The World Economy, 28(3), 407-434.
Tridimas, T. & Guiterrex-Fons, J. (2008). EU Law, International Law, and Economic Sanctions against Terrorism: The Judiciary in Distress. Fordham International LJ, 32(8), 660.