Foreign policy of Obama administration towards Iran
| Název práce v češtině: | |
|---|---|
| Název v anglickém jazyce: | Foreign policy of Obama administration towards Iran |
| Klíčová slova: | Obama, administrace, Írán |
| Klíčová slova anglicky: | Obama, administration, Iran |
| Akademický rok vypsání: | 2014/2015 |
| Typ práce: | diplomová práce |
| Jazyk práce: | angličtina |
| Ústav: | Katedra mezinárodních vztahů (23-KMV) |
| Vedoucí / školitel: | doc. PhDr. Mgr. Francis Raška, Ph.D. |
| Řešitel: | skrytý - zadáno a potvrzeno stud. odd. |
| Datum přihlášení: | 11.05.2015 |
| Datum zadání: | 11.05.2015 |
| Datum a čas obhajoby: | 22.06.2016 08:00 |
| Místo konání obhajoby: | IPS FSV UK, U kříže 8/661 158 00 Praha 5 – Jinonice |
| Datum odevzdání elektronické podoby: | 13.05.2016 |
| Datum proběhlé obhajoby: | 22.06.2016 |
| Oponenti: | PhDr. JUDr. Tomáš Karásek, Ph.D. |
| Kontrola URKUND: | |
| Zásady pro vypracování |
| The Iranian nuclear programme – contrary to its international obligations (Iran is one of the signing countries of The Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons) and in contradiction with the international community – is one of the largest global threats. A nuclear-armed Iran would present a threat not only to the Middle East. The development in Iran is leading up to the country soon gaining nuclear weapons, or the technological capacity to create them. The risk of abuse of Iranian nuclear equipment for creating nuclear weapons – given the Iranian advances in rocket technology - still exists. This claim is based on the knowledge of American and mostly Israeli analysts, intelligence and political scientists, that are watching the developments in the area.
The improvement of the relations between the USA and Iran is very unlikely, seeing as the United States and Iran have no diplomatic relations and neither side wants to change their policy on the nuclear issue. This process fundamentally affects the peace process in the Middle East and is the main cause of strife between the two countries. It will continue to be a cause for animosity between the two actors and it will keep destabilizing the security situation in the region. In enforcing its foreign policy the Obama administration relies on its traditional allies, including Israel and Saudi Arabia. Relations with Israel have been very disturbed by the latest events. The Geneva Agreement, concluded between Iran and a group composed of five permanent members of the UNSC and Germany in November 2013, was the first to openly recognize the right of uranium enrichment and the use of nuclear sources for civilian purposes to Iran. It was concluded after the August inauguration of the new Iranian president Hasan Ruhani, whose policy seemed friendlier towards the United States than his predecessor Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was. The signing of this agreement was paradoxically the reason for the conflicts between the US and its allies. France along with Israel sharply criticized the diplomatic approximation to Teheran. According to Israel, the agreement isn’t able to stop the continuation of the Iranian nuclear programme for military purposes. The control mechanisms aren’t harsh enough according to them. The next talks with Iran lead to a short term agreement, the Joint Plan of Action duration from the 20 January to the 20 July 2014, with a possible 6 month elongation, which limits the expansion of the Iranian nuclear programme in exchange for the dissolution of certain economic sanctions towards Iran. The talks about a complex solution to the Iranian nuclear programme problematic began in February 2014, with the fourth round ending on the 20 June 2014, without a satisfactory consensus. According to the US the inauguration of a new Iranian president bettered the chances of ending the American-Iranian diplomatic alienation. However the countries of the Persian Gulf, Israel and other regional governments voiced their concern, that the Iranian integration into the region and to the international community would give Iran more political and economical sources to support pro-Iranian movements in the Middle East. Iran provides financial resources and weapons to the Hezbollah, Hamas, supports Basher al Assad in Syria, Iraqi Shiite militia or the insurgents in Yemen and Bahrain. The situation is complicated and negotiations are in progress, however from the notes outlined above it is clear that the way in which the American administration has taken a stand in the question of the Iranian nuclear programme after the inauguration of ‘relatively moderate’ president Ruhani, is against the interests of Israel, it is unclear how realistic the threat that Iran will attack Israel with a nuclear weapon if the United States enforce their ‘all options’ stance . The Objectives In the last year there has been a rapprochement with Iran in United States policy. This work will evaluate this policy relating to security in the Middle East, in light of fundamental US strategic documents. The objective of this thesis will be to explore one specific case in depth; therefore no generally valid conclusions are expected. Theories The thesis will be based on the theoretical school of realism (Morgenthau, Politics Among Nations ). The concept that Morgenthau uses - that the principle of the international system is the balance of power, which is the fundamental stabilizing factor for sovereign nations - is the basic premise upon which this diploma thesis will be developed. The Realistic approach developed mainly in the United States after 1945 as a reaction to the ‘chaotic’ interwar period, the Second World War and the beginning of the Cold War with two dominant powers. Foreign policy is constantly evolving in a constant clash of power as every country tries to expand over another. In this conception the main strengths are power, decisiveness and speed of action which has an upper hand over discussions, compromise and the search for agreement. The main emphasis is put on the term security as protection of the existence of a country from another. The main acting country is one that can clearly define its state, national, interests which aren’t dependent on who is leading the country. The substance of realism lies in the existence of the nation-state; its key terms are balance of power, expansion of power, creating coalitions against the hegemonic. Realists generally argue that power is the most important factor in foreign policy. Realism is based on rationality, which brings with it the refusal of the moral dimension of foreign policy because according to the realists, most moral arguments simply cover the power interests of each country. 4 Hypotheses The main hypotheses of the proposed diploma thesis are as follows: 1. The misalignment of the security paradigm, caused by the approximation of the US and Iran, will lead to unforeseen changes in the relations between the United States and its regional allies (Israel, Saudi Arabia) 2. The presence of the United States in the Middle East is not possible without these key allies. 5 Methodology One case study based on the analysis of available documents. The study of sources from the Iranian viewpoint will be (next to the available documents from the American administration, where there are no language barriers) will be based on original texts and translated documents, which the Iranian administration published on the official web pages. When it comes to direct sources, there is a limitation: it is likely that some documents will only be available in Persian, or they won’t be available online or from any other public source. The proposed diploma thesis is based on the principle of qualitative study, which will contain three individual stages. It is in place to explain why I chose a qualitative study. I consider one of the characteristic aspects of a qualitative approach the focus on one or very few factors of the examined phenomenon. The security situation in the Middle East can be influenced by a number of different variables than just the studied stance of the US towards Iran. Focusing on more variables in the sense of analyzing more cases does not allow an in-depth analysis and a deeper understanding of the specific situation at the expense of generality. The qualitative method also provides a comparative advantage in terms of possibilities for the analysis of complex causal relations in the Middle East, allowing you to create an overall holistic image of the Middle East situation. |
| Seznam odborné literatury |
| America, Israel, and the Middle East: Confronting the Challenges of Tomorrow (online). Washington DC (USA): The Washington Institute for Near East Policy, 2008 (cit. 24. januára 2009). Dostupné z: http://www.washingtoninstitute.org/templateC04.php?CID=295
ALLIN, Dana H., SIMON, Steven. The Sixth Crisis: Iran, Israel, America and theRumors of War, New York: Oxford University Press, 2010. BOON, Kristen et al. Assessing President Obama's National Security Strategy. New York, N.Y.: Oxford University Press, 2011. Can Iran’s Nuclear Capacity Be Limited? Interview with Robert S. Litwak, Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars, The Council on Foreign Relations, July 19, 2014. CARDEN, Michael J. Mullen: Diplomacy Best Approach to End Iran’s Nuclear Proliferation. U.S. Department of Defense, April 18, 2010. As of August 15, 2011. URL <http://www.defense.gov/news/newsarticle.aspx?id=58792> DERSHOWITZ Alan. Countering Challenges to Israel's Legitimacy. In: Baker, Alan. Israel's Rights as a Nation- State in International Diplomacy. Jerusalem: Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs, 2011. DERSHOWITZ Alan. The Case Against Israel's Enemies: Exposing Jimmy Carter and Others Who Stand in the Way of Peace. Hoboken: John Wiley & Sons, 2008. DERSHOWITZ, Alan. The case for Israel. John Wiley & Sons, 2003. DERSHOWITZ, Alan M. Why Terrorism Works: Understanding the Threat, Responding to the Challenge, New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 2002. DOBBINS, James. Coping with a nuclearising Iran. Survival, 2011, 53.6: 37-50. DUNLAP Jr, Charles J. Anticipatory Self-Defense and the Israeli-Iranian Crisis: Some Remarks. ILSA J. Int'l & Comp. L., 2012, 19: 319. EISENSTADT, Michael. Deja Vu All Over Again? An Assessment of Iran's Military Buildup. Ahmed Hashim," Iran's Military Situation, 2012, 153-219. GUTTMAN, Nathan. Iran Leader Hassan Rowhani's Moderate Stance Poses Dilemma to Israel (June 21, 2013) HYMANS, Jacques EC; GRATIAS, Matthew S. Iran and the Nuclear Threshold: Where is the Line?. The Nonproliferation Review, 2013, 20.1: 13-38. KAHLILI, Reza: Iran Supreme Leader: the only solution for crisis is Israel´s destruction. Dailycaller, July 23, 2014. KATZMAN, Kenneth. Iran: US Concerns and Policy Responses. Washington, CRS 2014. LYNCH, Thomas Francis. Crisis Stability and Nuclear Exchange Risks on the Subcontinent: Major Trends and the Iran Factor. National Defense University Press, 2013. MCBRIDE, Michael; JUNE, Posted On. Evolution of the Immortals: The Future of Iranian Military Power. Journal Article| June, 2014, 29.4: 26am. MEARSHEIMER, John J. Kissing cousins: Nationalism and realism.Unpublished Manuscript. Chicago: University of Chicago, 2011. MEARSHEIMER, John J. The tragedy of great power politics. WW Norton & Company, 2001. MEARSHEIMER, John J.; WALT, Stephen M. The Israel lobby and US foreign policy. Macmillan, 2007. MENASHRI, David. Iran, Israel, and the United States: Regime Security vs. Political Legitimacy. Iranian Studies, 2014, 47.2: 367-371. MILANI, Mohsen M. Tehran's Take-Understanding Iran's US Policy. Foreign Aff., 2009, Vol. 88, No. 4, p. 46-62. PARSI, Trita. A Single Roll of the Dice: Obama’s Diplomacy with Iran. Yale University Press, 2012, 304 s. ISBN: 9780300169362 PARSI, Trita. Iran and the US: An inverted prisoner's dilemma. (May 16, 2014) PARSI, Trita. Why D.C. is wrong to discredit Iran’s new president. (June 28, 2013) PARSI, Trita. Treacherous Alliance: The Secret Dealings of Israel, Iran, and the United States, New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press, 2007. ROZEN, Laura. Will Iran's New President Defuse the Nuclear Crisis? (July 26, 2013). SHIFRINSON, Joshua R. Itzkowitz; PRIEBE, Miranda. A Crude Threat: The Limits of an Iranian Missile Campaign against Saudi Arabian Oil. International Security, 2011, 36.1: 167-201. SNOW, Donald M. Cases in American Foreign Policy. Pearson, 2013. TERRY, Patrick. US-Iran Relations in International Law since 1979: Hostages, Oil Platforms, Nuclear Weapons and the Use of Force. Libertas, 2009. The White House: First Step Understandings Regarding the Islamic Republic of Iran’s Nuclear Program.(Nov 23, 2013) The White House: President Obama Delivers Remarks on Iran's Nuclear Program (Nov 24, 2013) The White House: The Joint Plan of Action agreed to by the P5+1 and Iran in Geneva, Switzerland on November 24, 2013. The White House: President Obama Announces New Diplomatic Efforts with the Islamic Republic of Iran (Sept 27, 2013) U.S. Policy Toward Iran. URL <http://www.state.gov/p/us/rm/2013/202684.htm> WALTZ, K. N. Why Iran Should Get the Bomb. Foreign Affairs, 2012, Vol. 91, No. 4. |
| Předběžná náplň práce |
| The Structure of Diploma Thesis
Introduction 1. Theoretical and methodological framework 2. Current development in the area 2.1 U.S. Interests, Objectives, and Strategies 2.2. Iran’s Interests, Objectives, and Strategies 2.3. Other actors 3. Iran’s Weapons of Mass Destruction Programs 4. U.S. Policy Approaches 5. Possible Regional Implications Conclusion |
| Předběžná náplň práce v anglickém jazyce |
| The Structure of Diploma Thesis
Introduction 1. Theoretical and methodological framework 2. Current development in the area 2.1 U.S. Interests, Objectives, and Strategies 2.2. Iran’s Interests, Objectives, and Strategies 2.3. Other actors 3. Iran’s Weapons of Mass Destruction Programs 4. U.S. Policy Approaches 5. Possible Regional Implications Conclusion |