Week 8/Maria Rojas

Summary

The ongoing debate surrounding Iran's nuclear development is not confined to the Middle East; it has far-reaching implications for the stability and national security of the United States, as discussed in this week's readings. It became inevitable for me to discuss the notion of unilateralism versus multilateralism that we have been addressing and developing in class in recent weeks. The multidimensional analysis proposed by these readings, in addressing the threat posed by Iran's nuclear development from different perspectives, reinforced my opinion that the system is at a level of interdependence such that an individual state's actions in pursuit of its national interests will also entail negative consequences for it. This is a factor that leads states to reconsider their actions and act cautiously while pursuing their national interests.

The complexity of the Iran nuclear issue lies in the concept of complex interdependence. Each actor is pulling to their side but cautiously enough not to crash against the counterproductive consequences that might result from acting independently in an interdependent world. On one side, Iran claims that its nuclear program is for peaceful objectives, but on the other side, its uranium supplies point to military purposes. While this Middle Eastern country keeps developing its nuclear capability, the U.S. and its allies face the threat of an economic crisis due to the oil chain of supplies. Any disruption in oil supplies from the Persian Gulf could lead to a significant increase in oil prices, affecting the U.S. economy; interdependence. This is where the importance of U.S. military commitments in the Persian Gulf underlies. Furthermore, Iran's nuclear ambitions also have political consequences for the United States as U.S.-Israeli relations can be strained when it comes to the Iran nuclear deal, which also stands for the interdependency and complexity of the issue. Israel is concerned about the potential for a nuclear-armed Iran and seeks a more robust approach, including military options, while the U.S. leans towards diplomatic solutions.

What is then the correct approach? Undoubtedly, Iran's nuclear development threatens U.S. stability and national security. The complex interdependence between global politics and economics makes it challenging to address this issue in isolation. To mitigate the risk effectively, international cooperation is required. Now, are states willing to cooperate, or would they need to face a catastrophe before they understand what they need from each other? That remains to be seen.