Throughout all three of the 2016 presidential debates, candidates Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump have been vociferous about their tremendously differing opinions of the US-Iran nuclear deal. The Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) was implemented on January 16th, 2016 - an agreement which president Barack Obama took charge in formulating throughout the end of his presidency. One of the deal’s largest causes of controversy as well as sources of public concern, stems from the potential for Iran to violate the terms of the agreement. President Obama is quoted for having said that Iran will “not be allowed to acquire a nuclear weapon on my watch,”(The White House, 2015) but his “watch” is coming to an end. One of the major responsibilities of the future U.S. president will be to hold Iran to their commitments and to have immediate enforcement of strict sanctions should Iran violate the agreement. Many people are wondering, will the next president maintain the deal, or terminate it with the first chance that they get?
The two major political parties in the U.S., the Democrats, and the Republicans have a long tradition of ideological disunity. The Iran nuclear deal is no exception to their disagreement. Both parties are determined in prohibiting Iran from possessing nuclear arms, however, their approaches to restriction are contrasting. The Democratic platform has been in favor of a diplomatic agreement since the opening of the international discussion - it was the party who initiated the deal. The Democrats believe that a functional Iran-Nuclear deal "...verifiably cuts off all of Iran’s pathways to a bomb without resorting to war,” (The Iran Primer, 2016). This belief is rooted in the party's tradition of global diplomacy to achieve peace and security. However, the Republican Party has a distinctly alternative approach for a solution.
The Atlantic. (2016, October). When Donald Meets Hillary. Retrieved from http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2016/10/who-will-win/497561/
The Republican’s have claimed that the deal is an agreement which was exclusively made possible by the Obama Administration. However, once a Republican takes office the contract will likely be curtailed. This outcome is probable because in the Fall of 2015, the Republicans in Congress tried to block the deal but failed. The reasoning behind their political orientation tends to be grounded in the Republican distrust of Iran's leadership. Iranian Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khameni famously announced, “The struggle against American aggression, greed, plans and policies will be counted as a jihad, and anybody who is killed on that path is a martyr.” (Huntington, 1993). Iranian governance and politics are founded upon Islamism, which historically has been correlated with radicalism, as the quote exhibits. Although Khameni’s radical ideas have neutralized, along with Iranian leadership, the Republicans continue to resist embracing Iran’s positive political development, contrary to the Democrats.
While Hillary supports the deal, she takes a ‘Distrust and Verify’ approach to its enforcement (ballotpedia, n.d.). She has worked to make it clear that she is serious about implementing it well and not tolerating any breaks in the agreement. She outlined five “strong pillars” that address and raise the cost of Iranian’s support of terrorism. The first of these five is giving Israel advanced weapons; while acknowledging that she believes the Iran nuclear deal will make Israel safer, she wants to do so with humility and understanding. The second pillar is reaffirming that the Persian Gulf is a region of vital interest and if the allies and partners are threatened the US will act. It is necessary to make sure that surrounding areas of Iran feel safe and secure so they are not inclined to develop their own nuclear programs. Thirdly, she said she would build coalitions to counter Iran’s proxies and specifically Hezbollah. She voiced plans that would affect their funding, the strength of the rules prohibiting weapon transfer, and changing Hezbollah’s status to one of a terrorist organization. She also said she would enforce sanctions on everyone involved in Iran’s destabilizing activities such as its ballistic missile programs. Fourth, she threatened to “stand against Iran’s abuses at home”(Hillary for America, 2016, para.49) listing examples such as their detention of political prisoners and their policies that restrict people's creativity and freedom of expression. Lastly, she states, “our broader Iran policy needs to be embedded in a comprehensive regional strategy that promotes stability and counters extremism” (Hillary for America, 2016, para.50). Strong countries and governments that are powerful enough to fight back against extremism and radicalization while being able to securely and economically support their people are necessary in combating “the destructive regional conflicts that Iran fuels”(Hillary for America, 2016, para.52).
While Hillary supports the deal, she takes a ‘Distrust and Verify’ approach to its enforcement (ballotpedia, n.d.). She has worked to make it clear that she is serious about implementing it well and not tolerating any breaks in the agreement. She outlined five “strong pillars” that address and raise the cost of Iranian’s support of terrorism. The first of these five is giving Israel advanced weapons; while acknowledging that she believes the Iran nuclear deal will make Israel safer, she wants to do so with humility and understanding. The second pillar is reaffirming that the Persian Gulf is a region of vital interest and if the allies and partners are threatened the US will act. It is necessary to make sure that surrounding areas of Iran feel safe and secure so they are not inclined to develop their own nuclear programs. Thirdly, she said she would build coalitions to counter Iran’s proxies and specifically Hezbollah. She voiced plans that would affect their funding, the strength of the rules prohibiting weapon transfer, and changing Hezbollah’s status to one of a terrorist organization. She also said she would enforce sanctions on everyone involved in Iran’s destabilizing activities such as its ballistic missile programs. Fourth, she threatened to “stand against Iran’s abuses at home”(Hillary for America, 2016, para.49) listing examples such as their detention of political prisoners and their policies that restrict people's creativity and freedom of expression. Lastly, she states, “our broader Iran policy needs to be embedded in a comprehensive regional strategy that promotes stability and counters extremism” (Hillary for America, 2016, para.50). Strong countries and governments that are powerful enough to fight back against extremism and radicalization while being able to securely and economically support their people are necessary in combating “the destructive regional conflicts that Iran fuels”(Hillary for America, 2016, para.52).
Al Bawaba (2016, September 5). Ayatollah Khamenei just used his Hajj message to go all out on Saudi. Received From http://www.albawaba.com/loop/ayatollah-khamenei-just-used-his-hajj-message-go-all-out-saudi-880678
The fact that Donald Trump’s presidential plans are usually unclear makes the future very hard to predict. Throughout the three presidential debates, he consistently criticized the deal, making statements such as, “the worst deal I think I've ever seen negotiated [...] is the Iran deal”(The Washington Post, 2016). What the public does not know is if that was just a political move to discredit Obama and the Democratic party, or if he really thinks that the deal was disastrous for the US. What would happen if a President Donald Trump dissolved the Iran nuclear deal? The Republican presidential nominee has said he would do just that, calling the deal “disastrous”(The Washington Post, 2016). Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, Iran’s Supreme Leader, responded to Trump’s statements through writing that if the United States “tear[s] up the agreement, [Iran] will light it on fire” (The Big Story, 2016). If Trump becomes president he plans on making a contract that is remarkably strict. He also feels that over the past five years Iran had been in a slump, they were dying out, and the U.S. made them a power overnight (Ballotpedia, 2016). If Trump becomes president there is a possibility that instead of completely getting rid of the deal he will renegotiate its terms. Regardless, it is clear that Iran will have a negative reaction if the agreement is toiled with.
The Iran nuclear deal is one of great significance to the upcoming U.S. election. The foremost reason is due to the very different views held by the candidates, and thus the influence that they have over the views of their supporters. A future President Clinton would oversee stability and continuation of the deal. However, a future President Trump would cause radical change. Hillary Clinton has a clear plan regarding the Iran deal, which can be easily accessed on her website, whereas Donald Trump has no official alternative approach, aside from his frequently articulated desire to dissolve the agreement. Iran and the U.S. have finally found common ground and a diplomatic solution, however, Trump’s aggressive attitude towards Iran could destroy progress and lead to instability. An aggravated Iran raises speculations regarding their development of nuclear arms - which would impose insecurity unto the world.
References
Aubert E., Aull C., Coyle K., Eirich K., Haas J., Hilton S., Rosier S., (n.d.). 2016 presidential candidates on the Iran nuclear deal. Ballotpedia. Retrieved from https://ballotpedia.org/2016_presidential_candidates_on_the_Iran_nuclear_deal
The Big Story. (2016, June 14). Iran vows to burn nuclear agreement if US scraps it. Retrieved from http://bigstory.ap.org/article/09bd60ff24404fe896f508456cabb909/iran-vows-burn-nuclear-agreement-if-us-scraps-it
Blake A. (2016, September 26). The first Trump-Clinton presidential debate transcript, annotated. The Washington Post. Retrieved from https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/09/26/the-first-trump-clinton-presidential-debate-transcript-annotated/
Council on Foreign Relations. (2014, January 3). Hezbollah. Retrieved from http://www.cfr.org/lebanon/hezbollah-k-hizbollah-hizbullah/p9155
Hillary for America. (2016, January 31). Remarks at the Brookings Institution on the Iran Deal. Retrieved from https://www.hillaryclinton.com/post/remarks-brookings-institution-iran-deal/
Huntington, Samuel P. (1993). The Clashes Of Civilization? Foreign Affairs, 72 (3), 22-49
The Iran Premier (2016, July 25) Republican and Democratic Platforms on Iran. Retrieved from http://iranprimer.usip.org/blog/2016/jul/25/republican-and-democratic-platforms-iran
Mason, Melanie. Megerian, Chris. (2016, July 27). How the Democratic and Republican party platforms stacks up on climate change, Iran and more key issues. LA Times. Retrieved from http://www.latimes.com/politics/la-na-pol-democrats-republicans-platforms-20160727-snap-htmlstory.html
Office of the Press Secretary (2015, August 5). Remarks by the President on the Iran Nuclear Deal. The White House. Retrieved from https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2015/08/05/remarks-president-iran-nuclear-dea
Spaniel, W. (2016, July 11). Here’s what could happen if a President Trump tore up the Iran nuclear deal. The Washington Post. Retrieved from https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/monkey-cage/wp/2016/07/11/heres-what-could-happen-if-a-president-trump-tore-up-the-iran-nuclear-deal/
US Department of State (n.d.). Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action. Retrieved from http://www.state.gov/e/eb/tfs/spi/iran/jcpoa/\
Authors: Kate Zwigard, Ruben Eriksson, Kiana Hensen, Jacopo Benatti, and Adrion Rutledge
This is honestly a great blog post because I don't know much about the details regarding each candidate's position on this issue and I like how it clearly outlined each candidate's responses verbatim. It also related it to the election hopefully educating the audience before they vote. I also enjoyed the emphasis on how important this issue is outlined in the end of the post.
ReplyDelete