In these articles, issues regarding Iran’s nuclear program have been discussed extensively. Iran is committed to establish nuclear program, which according to the government, the program is only meant to produce electricity (Leverett 2009, 1).
However, the US administration has opposed development of the nuclear program arguing that Iran intends to use the program to build nuclear weapons. Due to continued resistance by Iran, the US government has proposed negotiations with the Islamic nation in order to reach an amicable solution.
This move has been supported by several countries and as a result, Iran has agreed to negotiate with the US in order to establish good international relation.
With good international relation, Iran is hopeful that international community will support its plan to develop nuclear program (Leonard 2009, 1). In fact, Iran government has shown its willingness to cooperate if other countries will support it from international pressure.
In contrast, Israel has strongly opposed the proposed negotiations by the US saying that negotiations are not necessary. According to Israel, the ultimate solution to this crisis is suspension of all activities aimed at developing nuclear program in Iran, which is a threat to global security and peace (Leverett 2009, 1).
Israel has proposed the use of military force against Iran instead of negotiations, which will only postpone this issue further. Because Iran worships the past, it is a bit hesitant to give in to Americans request based on history (Ghaemi 2009, 1). In 1970s, Iran cooperated with international community but it ended up being a disappointed nation. The Islamic nations is worried that history may repeat itself (Leverett 2009, 1).
From these articles, it is evidently clear that the US and Iran are different in terms of ideas and culture. This difference may pose a big challenge in success of the negotiations. For instance, the US focuses on the future and that is why the government wants Iran to come clean about nuclear program to make the future better.
However, Iran focuses on past and that is why it is committed to develop the nuclear program to compensate the past. By proposing negotiations, the US is “compromising principle for results” while Iran is committed to develop the nuclear program by “willing to sacrifice results to principle” (Ghaemi 2009, 1).
From 1970s and during the whole period of tug-of-war between the US and Iran over the nuclear program, relationship between these two nations has been poor (Leonard 2009, 1).
In both cases, the US government has portrayed its self-interest and it has always pushed the Islamic nation to the corner by imposing tough sanctions, a move that has been considered unfriendly. In addition, experts have also argued that the US diplomacy is purely based on self-interest. This proves that there is a conflict of interest in this issue.
Due to self-interest and constant sanctions by the US government, the current policy may be affected negatively. If the US continues to impose more sanctions and portray self-interest, Iran will lose confidence in the US administration and this will definitely jeopardize negotiations. If disagreements persist over this issue between the US and Iran, it will be even more challenging to resolve the current crisis (Leverett 2009, 1).
In summary, Iran’s nuclear program has been a major global issue and it has contributed a big debate in the international community. To see an end to the debate regarding Iran’s nuclear program, the US has proposed negotiations to find an amicable solution, a move that has been opposed by Israel. Israel has argued that the ultimate solution to this issue is suspension of all activities aimed at developing nuclear program in Iran.
References
Ghaemi, Nassir. 2009. The psychology of Iranian-American relations. Web.
Leonard, Barry. 2009. Iran: Nuclear Intentions and Capabilities: National Intelligence Estimate. Darby: Diane Publishers.
Leverett, Hillary. 2009. Pragmatists in Tehran. Web.