The U.S. Policies towards Irans Nuclear Program - Essay Example

Policy Changes Introduction: The world at its present has been shaped by many social, political and economic policies of powerful nations. The effects of these policies are not localized largely due to globalization that has shrunk the boundaries and created a unified system where any ripple generated at one part can spread its impact on the whole structure. Therefore, it is very important to keep a check on different policies that have the potential to shape the outcome of many lives. More importantly, any policy at fault should be removed or modified to serve the best interest of humanity as a whole. The United States of America is one of the most influential super powers of the world. The current policy of the USA pertaining to the nuclear program of Iran has failed to serve its purpose and should be looked upon from a different dimension to have any positive effect. Like an expired drug, any outdated or faulty policy, if kept implemented, can have its adverse reaction. This is an important concept to understand. The effect of the USA current policy is not limited to Iran but it shares a common interest of many countries around the world. Iran’s desire to acquire nuclear technology has raised many eyebrows on the international horizon (Davis 2011). America continues to follow a non-lenient policy on this matter and has to come up with a strong response. President Obama’s speech in Cairo also addressed the issue of Iran’s nuclear program clearly stating the country’s policy on the subject. The U.S. has its concerns over Iran’s peaceful propositions. Therefore, a conflict is inevitable. Currently, the U.S. follows a policy of implementing sanctions and using diplomatic tools to force Iran to give up its desire of pursuing nuclear technology. But nothing much has been achieved so far. Despite this fact few amendments have been made from the U.S. government in their current policy. As mentioned earlier, this has resulted in some side effects. Iran is now more determined to bypass the international forum. Retaliation also came in the form of Oil embargo that was imposed on the members of European Nation. Due to the fact that America has a history of rivalry with Iran, it could be deduced that any American enforcement will aggravate the situation. Moreover, it is the right of any country to utilize its resources to fuel the economy. Iran believes that a nuclear energy can resolve their crisis of energy needs and can boost their economy. Any obstacle from America that prevents Iran from achieving that goal will be viewed as a conspiracy against them. Therefore, a new policy is required to address this particular issue. A proposed policy could be a discussion with the Iranian Government over their energy needs, and an alternative solution to that crisis can be provided. How to Implement That Policy? The first and the foremost hurdle that resulted in the failure of the early policy was that it was implemented by the U.S. The history between the countries suggests that any proposition from any side will be dealt with criticism and suspicion (Fayazmanesh 2008). Moreover, this problem is not of the USA alone and president Obama made it very clear in his speech in Cairo that all the steps taken against Iran are in the best interest of all humanity. Let’s closely look at the situation, if Iran acquires nuclear technology, it will definitely initiate a nuclear arm race in the surrounding region that can have severe consequences. We cannot afford a third world war. If initiated, these nuclear weapons can lead to annihilation of our entire planet. But Iran is not ready to give up its program and will surely reject the future U.S. policies. The cause of such response towards the U.S. policies by Iran can be traced back to history. The only country in the history of mankind that practically used nuclear weapons to destroy two cities and killed thousands of people in a blink of an eye is none other than the U.S. Though, many justifications were given later on how it reduced the span of war but there is little doubt that it has served as a black mark on the face of United States for many decades. Still today, the U.S. holds one of the biggest stockpiles of nuclear weapons. Under these circumstances Iran’s protest against these sanctions can be justified to some extent. But it is a very serious issue for the whole globe and the U.S. cannot represent the whole world especially in this case. So if any policy has a chance to be successful than it should not be presented by the U.S. alone. But rather more united platform is required where most of the nations unite on a common agenda and address this issue. Most of the countries pursue for peaceful nuclear technology to fulfill their energy demands. If this is the case with Iran, than an alternative source of energy production can be proposed by International representatives. For example, use of solar panels to generate energy is a one possible solution. Similar solutions can be crafted by the experts and those policies can be presented to Iranian government. As mentioned earlier, this is a global issue so funds should be collected from the international platform and provided to Iran in order to assist in implementing the policies. The major concern regarding Iran’s nuclear program is its possible accessibility to the anti-social or terrorist groups (Jones 2011). Therefore, another possible policy is to provide Iran with the infrastructure that can protect its nuclear plants and make it invulnerable to terrorist’s penetration. Conclusion: So from all the discussion we can conclude that present the U.S. policies towards Iran’s nuclear program are not serving its purpose. In fact, there are some after effects of these polices which may progress if no amendments are made. Alternative policies include limiting the role of the U.S. in this issue and adopting a more international approach. Moreover, alternative solutions to the core purpose of Iran’s nuclear program should be devised and presented to the government. If still this program is inevitable than a proper infrastructure to ensure its security should be provided. A policy with a peaceful agenda is required and war is not the solution. Works Cited Davis, Lynn E. Iran's Nuclear Future: Critical U.S. Policy Choices. Santa Monica, CA: RAND, 2011. Print. Fayazmanesh, Sasan. The United States and Iran: Sanctions, Wars and the Policy of Dual Containment. London: Routledge, 2008. Print. Jones, Jason. The American Rhetorical Construction of the Iranian Nuclear Threat. London: Continuum, 2011. Print. Read More