Disarming a Nuclear Iran
Elietzer Rivera
POL 355: International Relations
Professor Carrie Hadaway
January 14, 2013

As we progress through the twenty first century many countries are becoming increasing globalized. Globalization has affected commerce, energy, diplomacy and many other aspects of daily living. With this increase also comes an increase in communications between nations and more awareness of capabilities that countries may have through intelligence collection or information leakage. This paper will illustrate a theory on why The United States wants to stop Iran from becoming a Nuclear power and also what means are available to make this goal achievable.
There are several theories that demonstrate reasoning why there is so much attention being drawn into the middle east and specifically Iran becoming a nuclear power when a few decades ago the United States was providing uranium and technology for the development of Iran’s energy infrastructure. This donation of nuclear material was all made possible by the Atoms for Peace program during President Dwight D. Eisenhower’s administration. (Atoms for Peace, 2013)
Atoms For Peace The atoms for peace program highlighted the need for the fear of nuclear proliferation to be removed and instead helped along in achieving the capacity and scientific knowledge to produce or enhance nuclear capabilities in a positive and peaceful manner, which can be applicable towards medicinal or energy resolutions. This program, which many believed was a double -edged sword, including other countries like France and Germany, which had contracts to build facilities in Iran. The reason why it was believed to be a double-edged sword is that while yes Iran received enriched uranium for power and medicine purposes it turned around and tried to make it into nuclear weapons.

Normative Theory The Normative theory in a political context means “the model to be” or what normal or right looks like. So, for instance, in the current political strife between many countries and Iran about their acquisition or development of material that is weapons grade and nuclear, one would say the normative approach is that if Iran was not producing or gathering weapons grade Uranium or Plutonium then it would allow inspectors access to inspect all their facilities properly and would not also carry out other projects in secret. “The model to be” or “normal thing to do” is that if there is nothing wrong going on then as agreed upon inspections should be carried out. Since Iran is not behaving normally and there are nuclear arms at stake there are ramifications for the actions that Iran is taking which could stop the process of building nuclear material or punish or a combination of the two.
Ramifications
In diplomacy there are many methods that can be employed in order to persuade a country to act in a particular manner. The range of actions employed can be positive or negative but are mostly negative and can be:

* Coercive Diplomacy and Deterrence is a method that uses a negative approach and lacks good incentives, which includes threats of using force or actually using force but is the most coercive (Viotti & Kauppi, 2009). * Economic Sanctions are sanctions or restrictions that are implanted against a countries imports, exports, finances, commerce or otherwise that would hurt the nation economically in varying degrees depending on how strict the imposing country wants to make it. This type of sanction is moderately coercive and is also negative in approach (Viotti & Kauppi, 2009). * Economic and other positive incentives is a method that can be used to give a positive reaction to normative behavior. For example, in exchange for uranium enriched enough to help with energy production Iran must allow for inspection of all nuclear facilities and not try to go weapons grade with any of the material. This is a similar agreement that was achieved in the Atoms for peace program. Incentives can also promise aid in exchange for a country to act in a certain manner. It is positive and non coercive (Atoms for Peace, 2013). * Compromising or reaching common ground so that each country feels satisfied in achieving what it wants is another method that can be used that is positive and non coercive (Viotti & Kauppi, 2009).
The United States has all these tools at their disposal to directly influence Iran in a negative or positive way so that it can abandon its nuclear weapons development. These sanctions can be applied by the nation acting on its own or in a group with several other nations so as to put more pressure or add more incentives depending on which path Iran takes. It also depends on Iran and its diplomats and leader’s ability and willingness to communicate with the other nations to reach an amicable agreement before the inevitable happens and many of the sanctions and other diplomatic efforts are exhausted which would lead to only one choice which is use of force.

REFERENCES:
Atoms for Peace. (2013, 01 14). Retrieved 01 14, 2013, from International Atomic Energy Agency: http://www.iaea.org/About/history_speech.html
Nuclear Energy Agency. (2012, October 28). Retrieved October 28, 2012, from Fukushima Daiichi: http://www.oecd-nea.org/press/press-kits/fukushima.html
Nuclear Regulatory Commission. (2012, 03 29). Retrieved 03 29, 2012, from http://www.NRC.gov
Viotti, P. R., & Kauppi, M. V. (2009). International Relations and World Politics:Security, Economy, Identity (Vol. 4). Upper Saddle River, New Jersey, USA: Pearson Prentice Hall.