International Crisis: Iran, European Union and USA-Israel

The article discusses the international crisis involving Iran, European Union, and USA-Israel. It proposes a diplomatic strategy to remedy the situation and avoid diplomatic fractures.

Surname 1
1
Name
Professor
Course
Date
International crisis: Iran, European Union and USA-Israel
The situation here it is a great threat and it puts nations in an awkward position. It puts
the Iranian government for instance in a position where the sanction is likely to be imposed back
on them since the allegations they are facing is a violation of the deal that they made in 2015
with six world powers including The United States, China, Russia, Britain, and Germany
(Jakobsen, 201). These allegations have come at a time that is kind of inconvenient for the
Iranian government because the current president of the United States is yet to review whether
they should indeed continue to suspend the sanction or they should bring them back (Jakobsen,
311). Iran is in dismay and despite their leader Tehran dismissing the allegations and one of the
greatest analyst in the middle east Daniel Gerlach having different opinions on the allegations,
claiming that the intelligence provided by Israel is true but was not the present situation in the
ground since it had come from before the 2015 nuclear deal was actually penned down by Iran
and the six world powers. The United States president is yet to make a decision regarding the
Israel allegations on Iran not being able to uphold their end of the deal in the 2015 nuclear deal

Surname 2
and that they still have in their possession the nuclear weapons in a program called ‘Project
Amad’ and also documents were present to ascertain this according to Israeli prime minister
Benjamin Netanyahu. The United States claimed that they already had this information (Drury et
al, 59). A decision is yet to be made regarding this tense situation that involves a number of the
nation and therefore a diplomatic strategy needs to be brought in to try and remedy the already
worsening situation so as to avoid international incidents and diplomatic fractures (Haynes, 107).
The strategy to help in the remedy of this situation is clearly explained below.
Proposed diplomatic strategy
It is often important to note that the key to solving any problem whosoever is to get to the
root cause of the problem. In this case, for instance, I can confidently argue that whether or not
the allegations imposed on Iran by the Israeli prime minister are true, there must exist a
meaningful explanation for why the Iranian government would still hesitate to let go their
nuclear weapons regardless of the deal that exists (Tocha, 56). One, the threats of sanctions to
make Iran stop their pursuit of nuclear weapons and activity rises a great concern to the Iranian's
and their interest in their send of prestige and general nationalism. The Iranian’s feel that as a
country no matter how many deals they get into their primary goal should be focused on
safeguarding their nationalism and nothing else (Tocha, 69).
Secondly, it is possible that members of the international community feel that the
demands imposed on Iran are not legitimate and that they are unfair and excess. National interest
comes first regardless of the threats that come with it (Haynes, 227). Having looked at some of
the possible reasons making Iran to act the way they are acting, according to the allegations of

Surname 3
the Israeli Prime Minister, there are a number of strategies that can be put in place to remedy this
situation and make it favorable to all the parties involved (Snyder et al, 344).
The appropriate strategy to be employed here is the concept of Coercive Diplomacy. Well,
coercive diplomacy involves the use of coerced so as to provoke a change in the opponent’s
behavior (Tocha, 76). This change might or might not favor the opponent but that is not what is
of importance here. It should be noted that in this coercive diplomacy, persuasion is also an
important virtue and plays a major role in making the opponent change their behavior (Jakobsen,
371).
There are certain features that are very distinct from the concept of coercive diplomacy
(Sechser, 105). One there must be a demand that is posed to the opponent. Two there must exist
a threat of punishment and three there must be a deadline with which the opponent is supposed to
meet and comply (Tocha, 101). It is more like an ultimatum but in this case, it is done through
peaceful negotiations and persuasion.
For Iran’s case, the best possible way of resolving this fragile issue threating sanction and
even diplomatic fractures between the involved nations and the unions involved is to have a sit-
down and iron this issue out (Drury et al, 89). This sit down should comprise of Iran who is
being alleged to still continue with their activities in nuclear weapons, Israeli whose are the
primary claimers that Iran is still engaged in nuclear activities and the six-word powers who
were involved in the 2015 nuclear deal. In this sit-down, it should be noted that the concept of
coercive diplomacy should be the driver. New terms and conditions should be set, the terms and
conditions set should, however, have the following characteristics; should be legitimate, this
means that the terms should not in any way undermine the sense of nationality of the Iranian
people and should at the same time be considerate to the fact that a peace is something priceless

Surname 4
and we should, therefore, by all means, try to see to it that peace prevails. Also, the Iranian
government should be assured that in the nearby future there will not be any forms of additional
demands and threats of sanctions. They should be certain that the demand stipulated therein
would be final and that there would not be any black mailings in the future (Tocha, 126).
Allegations and accusations are things that are rarely avoided. Every nation is on the watch to
see that certain agreed-upon rules are not violated. It should be noted that although this is a good
idea, these allegations and accusations should only be made if there exist some great certainty
that these allegations might be indeed true. This would not only help in reducing the constant
happening accusations and allegations like the case above but it would also create some kind of
respect between different nations nationalism and sense of prestige (Drury et al, 219). These
allegations have come during an era that is somewhat badly arranged for the Iranian government
on the grounds that the present leader of the United States is yet to audit whether they ought to
be sure keep on suspending the endorse or they ought to bring them back. Iran is with
apprehension and regardless of their pioneer Tehran rejecting the allegations and one of the best
expert in the center east Daniel Gerlach having distinctive conclusions on the allegations,
guaranteeing that the insight gave by Israel is valid yet was not the current circumstance in the
ground since it had originated from before the 2015 atomic arrangement was really penned
around Iran and the six world forces. The United States president is yet to settle on a choice with
respect to the Israel allegations on Iran not having the capacity to maintain their finish of the
arrangement in 2016 atomic arrangement and that despite everything they currently possess the
atomic weapons and furthermore reports were available to learn this as indicated by Israeli head
administrator Benjamin Netanyahu. The United States guaranteed that they as of now had this
data. A choice is yet to be made with respect to this strained circumstance that includes some of

Surname 5
the country and along these lines a discretionary methodology should be gotten to attempt and
cure the officially declining circumstance in order to maintain a strategic distance from universal
occurrences and conciliatory cracks.

Surname 6
Works cited
Abrahms, Max. "The political effectiveness of terrorism revisited." Comparative Political
Studies 45.3 (2012): 366-393.
Drury, A. Cooper, Patrick James, and Dursun Peksen. "Neo-Kantianism and Coercive
Diplomacy: The Complex Case of Economic Sanctions." International Interactions 40.1
(2014): 25-51.
Fravel, M. Taylor. "The limits of diversion: Rethinking internal and external conflict." Security
Studies 19.2 (2010): 307-341.
Haynes, Kyle. "Lame Ducks and Coercive Diplomacy: Do Executive Term Limits Reduce the
Effectiveness of Democratic Threats?." Journal of Conflict Resolution 56.5 (2012): 771-
798.
Jakobsen, Peter Viggo. "Pushing the limits of military coercion theory." International Studies
Perspectives 12.2 (2011): 153-170.
Sechser, Todd S. "Reputations and signaling in coercive bargaining." Journal of Conflict
Resolution (2016): 0022002716652687.
Sherr, James. Hard diplomacy and soft coercion: Russia's influence abroad. Brookings
Institution Press, 2013.
Snyder, Glenn Herald, and Paul Diesing. Conflict among nations: Bargaining, decision making,
and system structure in international crises. Princeton University Press, 2015.

Surname 7
Tocha, Monika. "The EU and Iran’s Nuclear Programme: Testing the Limits of Coercive
Diplomacy. College of Europe EU Diplomacy Paper 1/2009." EU Diplomacy
Paper (2009).
Zhao, Suisheng. "CHANGING LEADERSHIP PERCEPTIONS The Adoption of a Coercive
Strategy." Across the Taiwan Strait. Routledge, 2013. 111-138.