Millennium Development Goals & Iran - Essay Example

Millennium Development Goals and Iran: Millennium Development Goals, Conflict and Prospects for the Future Iran is a country located in the southernand western Asia. The country is the 18th largest country in the world and as per 2010 census, the country had a population of 79 million. The country has the fourth largest petroleum reserves and the second largest gas reserves globally. It therefore plays an important role in the international energy security. Although security is one of the major concerns in Iran, the state is committed to the achievement of the 8 millennium development goals (MDGs). The state has not fully met all these goals but it has made some notable progress. With the utilisation of its economic resources and good governance, the country is likely to experience improved human development and achieve most of the MDGs by 2015. Main Argument The relations between countries under the current international system can be explained through the theory of Liberalism. As liberals, members of the international community support ideas like free and fair elections, capitalism, respect for human rights, liberal democracy, freedom of religion and constitutionalism and reject authoritarian economic and political structures. They believe in the importance of equal rights and liberty of every individual (Gray 21). These relations can also be understood from a constructionist perspective. International relations existed from ancient days and this makes the existing international relations socially and historically contingent, not inevitable consequences of the nature of mankind. As such, international relations are shaped by everyday interactions and social practices. From this perspective, structures of human association are shaped by the ideas they share not material possessions. These ideas also construct the interests and identities of the various actors that come together (Wendt 1). The two theories explain why nations have come together and formed the United Nations (UN) and, economic institutions like Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Bank. Through the these institutions, they have jointly identified and sought to address various issues touching on human life like human rights, agendas of human development, international security among others. Part of the efforts includes the development and adoption of the MDGs in 2000. MDGs are a set of 8 development goals that every country in the world is expected to accomplish by 2015. As part of the international community and as a developing nation, Iran supports the pursuit of the MDGs. These are, eradicating extreme poverty and hunger, achieving universal primary education, promoting gender equality and empowering women, reducing child mortality rates improving maternal health, combating HIV/AIDS, malaria, and other diseases, ensure environmental sustainability and developing a global partnership for development. So far, the government has taken several actions to ensure the realisation of the MDGs within the stipulated time period. Concerning extreme poverty, the proportion of the population living below $1 per day has decreased from 0.9% in 1999 to 0.2% in 2005 while those living below $2 per day dropped from 7.3% to 3.1%. This shows that the average income for persons living below $1 and 2$ per day has increased. Government measures have also reduced the poverty line/food poverty gap from 3.9% in 1999 to 1.9% in 2005. The percentage of those suffering from extreme hunger has fallen from 13.5% in 1999 to 7% in 2006. The data available at the Statistical Centre of Iran indicates a one third drop in the percentage of children aged below 5 who are underweight. It dropped sharply from 15.8% in 1999 to 5% in 2006, showing a greater improvement and an indication of a high possibility of achieving or surpassing the 50% target by 2015 (UNDP 1). Information from the national official math indicates that the Iranian government has boosted primary enrolment rates to 94% and one important feature is that girl deficit in schools has been turned into girl surplus (Hinsaw 1). Information from UNDP indicates even higher figures. The UNDP report indicates that by 2005, the state had already attained a 98% net enrolment rate, a 13% increase from the 85% recorded in 1990. This has raised literacy rates of women to 96.7% in 2006 from the 81.1% recorded in 1990. Gender equality and empowerment of women has been promoted through education. Government efforts have increased the enrolment of female students to various levels of education from 7.2% in 1990 to 94.3% in 2005 (UNDP 1). More females are also participating in education beyond primary school. The country is on a good track to achieving the two-third reduction in child mortality rate. Immunisation programs have been boosted and by 2003, 99% of the children were immunised against measles (Regional committee for the Eastern Mediterranean 3). There is a marked improvement in maternal health as 97% of the population now receive maternal care. The country is also faring on well in its efforts to achieve the remaining goals touching on diseases, environmental sustainability and developing global partnership for development. The government is engaging in various international economic agreements and activities. Generally, the country is far better than other countries in the eastern Mediterranean region in terms of achieving MDGs as indicated by the 2011 report by the Regional committee for the Eastern Mediterranean. The UNDP has been on the forefront of helping the Iranian governments in its efforts of meeting the MDGs. Counter arguments One of the theories that provide a counter-argument in analysing international relations is realism. This theory prioritises national security and interest over morality, social reconstructions and ideology. One of its suggestions is that there is no actor above the state who has the power to regulate its interactions and states only form relations with others at will and not as driven by dictation. It also suggests that sovereign states are the chief actors in international system and attention is given to large powers due to their large influence internationally, that power determines state relations and that interjection of values and morality into international relations results to diplomatic rigidity, reckless commitments and the escalation of conflict. Such an approach to international relations brings in the aspect of egocentricity. This cannot acknowledge the development of stable and peaceful international relations nor encourage the members of the international community to come together and jointly identify and seek to resolve various issues touching on mankind. This means that such an approach to international relations could not have encouraged the formation of international bodies like the UN, OECD, World Bank and IMF which seek to enhance the social, political and economic well being of the entire global community. The other theory that provides a counter argument for the current state of international relations is the dependency theory. This theory explains that resources flow from poor nations to wealthy nations thus impoverishing the poor nations while enriching the wealthy nations. Some of its premises are that wealthy nations use various means to perpetuate dependency among poor nations and use military force or economic sanctions to counter the efforts of the poor nations to resist their influences. It also suggests that resources flow from poor to developed nations without which the developed nations could not be as wealthy as they are. An example of such a control is the sanction imposed on Iran because of its nuclear program yet the government claims that its nuclear mission is peaceful. Such a theory gives the impression that the developing nations are at the periphery of the world system instead of being integrated and that developing nations are totally at the mercy of the developed nations. However, this theoretical perspective gives a limited view of the actual relations that exist between nations and neither does it acknowledge their existing unity and mutual respect despite economic disparities among members. The UN as a global body, developed nations, IMF and World Bank always work towards enhancing the economic development of poor nations by providing the required capital. This questions arguments that international relations work against developing nations. The two theories are therefore limited in their approach to international relations and this validates the use of constructionist and liberal approach. The two theories take a wider and realistic approach to the existing international relations. Policy proposal Since it has already formulated policies and made a good progress towards the achievement of the MDGs, Iran only needs to ensure a timely and commendable accomplishment of these goals. In order to improve its prospects of meeting the MDGs, Iran needs to intensify investment especially in areas that still far from the targets set and those that have the potential of influencing the achievement of other goals. An example is poverty and hunger reduction. For now, there is no need for global action in the area of MDGs. Iran and all other states should be allowed to accomplish what they can by 2015 then a way forward can be formulated in response to achievements made. Conclusion Iran is committed to supporting the MDGs and the nation has already made a good progress towards the achievement of these goals. MDGs were set by the wider international community and they apply equally to all nations. This indicates the existence of international relations among nations and these relations can be best understood using liberalism and constructionist perspectives. These theories portray the international community as an aggregation of states brought together by common goals, interest and whose relation with each other are shaped by ideas and not wealth and power disparities. Counterarguments for this perspective are given by realism and dependency theories. These theories portray the international community as a composition of states where the rich and powerful states forcefully controls, exploit and exclude the poor nations and where national interests mainly direct state behaviour. These theories do not take an all round analysis of the existing international relations or acknowledge unity that exist among global states, especially among the poor and rich. This makes liberalism and constructionist best theories for understanding international relations. Works Cited Gray John. Liberalism. Minneapolis. University of Minnesota Press. 1995. Hinsaw Drew (2010). “Has Iran met its Millennium Development Goals?”Online: http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Global-News/2010/0922/Has-Iran-met-its-Millennium-Development-Goals. Retrieved from 29th March, 2012. Regional committee for the Eastern Mediterranean (2011). Progress report on Achievement of the Millennium Development Goals. Online: ttp://www.emro.who.int/rc58/PDF/EMRC58INFdoc03en.pdf. Retrieved from 29th March, 2012. UNDP (2007). “UNDP Iran and the MDGs.” Online: http://www.undp.org.ir/index.php/millennium-development-goals/the-mdgs-in-iran. Retrieved from 29th March, 2012. Wendt Alexander. Social Theory of International Politics. Cambridge. Cambridge University Press. 1999. Read More