Search

On July 14, 2015, under the leadership of the Obama administration, the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action—referred to as the Iran Nuclear Deal—was signed. After 35 years of diplomatic isolation, the agreement marked a watershed moment in the United States–Iran relations and achieved a key US national security objective regarding nuclear non-proliferation. However, the agreement faced significant domestic opposition grounded in concerns that Iran was untrustworthy. Yet, the prospect of withdrawal generated a sense of insecurity that the United States's status as a "responsible world leader" would be undermined, despite ongoing anxieties around Iran's compliance. What explains such a paradox in foreign policy preferences? By incorporating discursive institutionalist approaches with ontological security perspectives, I work to show how President Obama's entry into the agreement generated ontological insecurities as he struggled to displace existing narratives around Iran as a hostile, untrustworthy actor. Yet, Iran's compliance with the agreement made it equally difficult for Trump to justify withdrawal; instead, his efforts raised additional concerns that America's international standing would be undermined. Theoretically, this paper incorporates discursive institutionalist insights with ontological security to disaggregate how different conceptions of the "Self" are contested and activated in policy debates in ways that lead to instability and variation in US foreign policy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study investigates emotions conveyed in US presidential speeches and media coverage regarding the Iraq War and the Iran nuclear deal during 2003 and 2015. The researchers gathered and examined news stories about the two policies, all official speeches delivered by George W Bush and Barack Obama, and opinion polls conducted during the respective six-month period in those two years. Nine discrete emotions were coded to capture the valence and volume in the speeches and news media content. The study finds that emotions appear more frequently in the Iraq discourse than in the Iran counterpart. President Bush used more negative emotions while President Obama employed more positive emotions. Emotion in the media coverage is constant and stable across the two policy periods; yet negative emotions are more prevalent than positive counterparts in the media despite distinct foreign policies. The study also examines public opinion trends toward the two policies for inferring potential linkage. This article contributes to the conceptual nexus among emotional persuasion, journalism pattern, and foreign policy-making process. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article focuses on debate over ethics of negotiations for Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action nuclear deal. Topics discussed include Iran's history of pushing boundaries with its nuclear program; red lines set forth by the former U.S. President Obama Administration with respect to the deal; and Iran's role in providing accurate information to the International Atomic Energy Agency with respect to the same.

The article discusses the issue of Iran nuclear deal announced by U.S. President Donald Trump in 2018. It states the Iran nuclear deal announced by earlier U.S. President Barack Obama did not had legal sanction as International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) was not involved in the deal and G 31 comprising 28 EU members plus the U.S., China and Russia had played a role in the deal without proper text and kept wide open nuclear deal and Trump's move will not impact international relations.

The article explores the U.S.-Iran Nuclear engagement dealing with the U.S.-Iran relations owing to the Iranian nuclear dispute. Topics include tensions between U.S.-Iran, collaborations between U.S. President Barack Obama and Iranian President Hassan Rouhani, and Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA). Also discussed are topics such as role of UN Security Council (UNSC) and the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT). The author also discusses U.S. sanctions such as the 2010 Comprehensive Iran Sanctions, Accountability, and Divestment Act (CISADA).

The article discusses the former U.S. President Barack Obama's role in the development the P5+1 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) with Iran, including in regard Obama's perspective on nuclear weapons disarmament and the JCPOA's objective in preventing Iran from developing nuclear weapons. An overview of IAEA's (International Atomic Energy Agency's) role in ensuring Iran does not violate the Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty (NPT) is provided.

Much like Iran's nuclear program, scholars and policy makers are largely puzzled to understand Iran's intentions in developing its ballistic missile program. The aim of this study is to understand Iran's objectives in developing its ballistic missiles arsenal. To fulfill this objective, the article reviews the entire history of Iran's ballistic missile program. It hypothesizes that just like its nuclear program, Iran developed its ballistic missiles arsenal as a strategy of deterrence, a response to Iraq's invasion and Washington's policy of containment. The second hypothesis held that Iran's determination to continue developing its ballistic missile program might be an attempt to dissuade its rivals from exercising power in the Middle East. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Iran, the United States, and several world super-powers signed a historic nuclear agreement over the summer of 2015. The Agreement is a comprehensive plan of action, with an unprecedented level of minutia and detail regarding Iran's commitment to curb its nuclear program in exchange for the lifting of United Nations-imposed sanctions against Iran. This Agreement, if it is successfully implemented, may represent President Obama's most significant foreign policy achievement and may become the most important element of President Obama's legacy. This Article will examine the Iran Nuclear Agreement by focusing on the events which led to the imposition of sanctions against Iran and to the ultimate negotiation of this Agreement, the structure of the Agreement; this Article will also discuss the most significant advantages and disadvantages of this somewhat risky deal. This Article will conclude that the Iran Nuclear Agreement could become one of President Obama's biggest foreign policy accomplishments in the Middle East. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses the U.S. President Barack Obama's policies towards the Middle East, including the 2015 Iran Nuclear Deal to prevent Iran from developing nuclear weapons, instability in the region, the terrorist group Islamic State (IS) and U.S. involvement in the Syrian Civil War. Obama's withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq is discussed. The U.S.'s involvement in the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict, including Obama's relationship with Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu, is discussed.