Search

Begin New Search Topic Foreign Policy Political Geography Tehran

1. The Saudi Factor in Pakistan-Iran Relations

Author:
Muhammad Salman Khan
Publication Date:
12-2014
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Iranian Review of Foreign Affairs
Institution:
Center for Strategic Research (CSR)
Abstract:
National interest often forms the core of bilateral ties between states. No matter how much idealism is peddled to explain the unassailability of the State's bilateral relations, the national interests and related diplomatic preferences spawn abrasion in these ties. The change of leadership is a consequence of elections results in a national reassessment of foreign policy. This paper attempts to highlight Pakistan's foreign policy dilemma regarding the walking of a tightrope between Tehran and Riyadh. It is argued that the balancing act of Islamabad in this triad is further complicated in the aftermath of 2013 general elections in Pakistan. The new Nawaz Sharif administration's unveiled connection with the Saudi Kingdom, the current tides in the Saudi-Iran-U.S. triangle, and the impending and complex drawdown of international forces from Afghanistan further confounds the trajectory of Pakistan's foreign policy, especially in the zero sum dynamics of Saudi-Iran rivalry.
Topic:
Foreign Policy
Political Geography:
Pakistan, Afghanistan, United States, Iran, East Asia, Tehran, Saudi Arabia, and Riyadh

2. Dealing with Iran: How can the EU Achieve its strategic Objectives?

Author:
Shirin Pakfar
Publication Date:
05-2011
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Danish Institute for International Studies
Abstract:
The European Union has a unique opportunity to prove its relevance as a global foreign policy actor through resolving the international community's standoff with the Islamic Republic of Iran. Using its High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy and its member states, the EU should utilize its powerful trade and energy ties with Tehran to embark on a dialogue with the regime that goes beyond the nuclear programme and addresses a broader set of issues of mutual concern.
Topic:
Security, Foreign Policy, and Diplomacy
Political Geography:
Europe, Iran, Middle East, and Tehran

3. Fresh sanctions on Iran : Will these help?

Author:
Kingshuk Chatterjee
Publication Date:
08-2010
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Institute of Foreign Policy Studies, University of Calcutta
Abstract:
By all reckoning, the latest round of UN sanctions on Iran (Resolution 1929, 9th June 2010), backed up by further extension and expansion of the scope of US sanctions (June 2010) and imposition of EU sanctions on 26th July 2010, should make life very difficult for the Islamic Republic. The continued tightening of the sanctions regime indicates the serious concerns that Tehran have aroused over the development of its nuclear programme. Iran professes its commitment to only a civilian nuclear programme in conformity with its obligations under the Nuclear Non Proliferation Treaty (NPT); a large number of states of the international community suspect Iran of developing a military programme behind the cover of its legitimate civilian one. Tehran's protestations of innocence of the charge have regularly been dismissed by most of its neighbours, and even the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) has not been fully satisfied on this point by Tehran. The issue has generated a set of proposed responses from various members of the international community, ranging from extreme options of surgical strikes against Iran's nuclear facilities (favoured by Israel, and under consideration in some segments of the US administration), through moderate options of international sanctions regime (favoured by most of the states, including USA and the EU) to the softer options of persuasion by continued and growing diplomatic engagement (China and Russia). Over the past two years, international opinion has steadily drifted towards a tight sanctions regime, reflected in the UN Resolution in June 2010 and that of the EU in July. Valid questions are, however, being raised about the efficacy of the international sanctions regime.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, United Nations, and Sanctions
Political Geography:
Russia, United States, China, Iran, Israel, and Tehran

4. Iran: A View From Moscow

Author:
Dmitri V. Trenin and Alexey Malashenko
Publication Date:
10-2010
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
Abstract:
Iran's emergence as a rising power is straining its relations with Russia. While many outside observers assume the two countries enjoy a close relationship, in reality it is highly complex. Although Iran and Russia have strong economic and military ties, Moscow is increasingly wary of Tehran's growing ambitions.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Nuclear Weapons, Bilateral Relations, and Nuclear Power
Political Geography:
Russia, Iran, Tehran, and Moscow

5. U.S.-Iranian Engagement: The View from Tehran

Publication Date:
06-2009
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
International Crisis Group
Abstract:
For perhaps the first time since Iran and the U.S. broke ties in 1980, there are real prospects for fundamental change. The new U.S. president, Barack Obama, stated willingness to talk unconditionally. Iran's Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Khamenei, implicitly blessed dialogue, and presidential candidates are vying to prove they would be the most effective interlocutor. Yet, while U.S. objectives and tactics are relatively familiar, little is known of Iran's thinking, even as much is assumed. Western interaction with its opaque political system and decision-making has both shrivelled and been narrowly focused on the nuclear file. Under-standing Iran's perspective is critical if engagement is to succeed. This briefing, based on meetings with officials and analysts, seeks to shed light on what Tehran thinks about dialogue, its goals and visions of a future relationship. It concludes that while full normalisation might be out of reach for now, there is a chance to achieve a more realistic objective: the start of a long-term dialogue that minimises risks of confrontation and advances areas of mutual interest.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Diplomacy, and Nuclear Weapons
Political Geography:
United States, Iran, and Tehran

6. Iran, the United States, and the Gulf: The Elusive Regional Policy

Author:
Marina Ottaway
Publication Date:
11-2009
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
Abstract:
Any effective diplomatic approach to Iran must involve a regional strategy. While Iran's nuclear program is presently the most urgent dimension for the United States and the international community to confront, unless the country can be reintegrated into a normal web of international relations, any progress made on that front is likely to be short-lived. Iran's neighbors — particularly the members of the Gulf Cooperation Council, which share a concern for Gulf security — can be important players in that process of reintegration. These six states, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Bahrain, Qatar, the United Arab Emirates, and Oman, are afraid of Iranian hegemony in the Gulf, but are too small or too timid to challenge their northern neighbor, so they seek to develop normal relations with Tehran while protecting their interests.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Diplomacy, and Bilateral Relations
Political Geography:
United States, Iran, Kuwait, Tehran, Arabia, Bahrain, Qatar, and Oman

7. Iran: Is Productive Engagement Possible?

Author:
Karim Sadjadpour
Publication Date:
10-2008
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
Abstract:
Although Tehran and Washington appear hopelessly divided, issues of broad mutual concern reveal important overlapping interests. The United States can more effectively support democracy and human rights in Iran with policies that facilitate, rather than impede, Iran's modernization and reintegration in the global economy. The next U.S. president should not immediately seek comprehensive engagement with Tehran, as this might enhance Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's chances of reelection in Iran's June 2009 presidential elections. The United States must deal with those who hold power in Tehran, namely Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. Given the widespread mutual mistrust between Washington and Tehran, confidence should be built with negotiations on areas of common interest, such as Iraq and Afghanistan, rather than those of little or no common interest, such as the Palestinian–Israeli conflict or the nuclear issue. When it comes to U.S.–Iranian interaction, the record shows that “secret” or “private” discussions out of public earshot have a greater success rate. Building confidence in the public realm will be difficult, as politicians on both sides will likely feel the need to use harsh rhetoric to maintain appearances. It is imperative that Washington maintain a multilateral approach toward Iran, especially regarding the nuclear issue. Tehran is highly adept at exploiting rifts in the international community and diplomatic efforts to check Iran's nuclear ambitions will unravel if key countries approach Iran with divergent redlines. Powerful spoilers—both within Iran and among Iran's Arab allies—have entrenched economic and political interests in preventing U.S.–Iranian reconciliation.
Topic:
Security, Foreign Policy, and Weapons of Mass Destruction
Political Geography:
Afghanistan, United States, Iran, Washington, Middle East, Israel, Tehran, and Palestine

8. U.S.-Iran Relations: Normalization in the Future?

Author:
Judith S. Yaphe
Publication Date:
01-2002
Content Type:
Working Paper
Abstract:
Since the establishment of the Islamic Republic of Iran in 1979, the United States has tried to find a framework for understanding this enigmatic country. America defended its commitments to help an ailing Shah in exile but was ill prepared to deal with the crises that raged in and around Iran in the 1980s: U.S. diplomats were held hostage in Tehran for 444 days, militant clerics tried to export revolutionary Islamic governance across the Gulf, and Iraq invaded Iran, ostensibly to stave off a Shiah Islamist tidal wave.
Topic:
Foreign Policy
Political Geography:
United States, Iraq, Iran, Middle East, and Tehran

9. The Arab League Summit: Opportunities Amid The Vitriol?

Author:
Rovert Satloff
Publication Date:
03-2001
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
The Washington Institute for Near East Policy
Abstract:
In the Middle East, this week witnessed a series of events occurring at such breakneck speed that it is important not to lose the significance of each: On Thursday, President Bush issued an unprecedented statement calling on Chairman Yasir Arafat to "stop the violence," a statement that could lay down a marker by which the administration judges the efforts of the Palestinian Authority (PA) and which could determine the direction of the U.S.–Palestinian relationship under the new administration. On Wednesday, Israel's national unity government launched retaliatory attacks against Arafat's personal guard, Force 17, underscoring Israel's intent to hold the chairman personally responsible for the terrorism emanating from within his close circle. On Monday and Tuesday, bombs went off inside the heart of Israel — responsibility for which was claimed by the Iranian-backed Palestinian Islamic Jihad, suggesting that Tehran is eager to tap pro-Hizballah sympathy and compete with the Tanzim and other Fatah elements for the pacesetter's role in the Palestinian uprising. Also on Tuesday, the PA chose an all-or-nothing option at the United Nations, demanding a Security Council vote on a resolution that the United States had no trouble vetoing — one calling for an international protection force for Palestinians — rather than pursuing diplomacy to bring to a vote a watered-down, but still problematic, resolution on which Washington was prepared to compromise. And on Sunday, Israel's Likud-led government issued a communique affirming its intent to seek the full implementation of signed agreements with the Palestinians, specifically citing its willingness to fulfill the requirement for a third "further redeployment" — territorial withdrawal in the West Bank — in the context of full compliance with the Wye River Memorandum. Each of these items alone has significant ramifications for the direction of Arab–Israeli relations, the Palestinian uprising, and U.S. policy toward the peace process. Taken together, they suggest a situation in great flux with emerging trends that are both ominous (e.g., Iran's deepening role) and positive (e.g., Bush's forthrightness on violence, Israel's balance of diplomacy and force).
Topic:
International Relations, Foreign Policy, and International Organization
Political Geography:
United States, Washington, Middle East, Israel, Tehran, Palestine, and Arab Countries