|

Brown: Landmark Iranian nuke deal

BY MARCUS BROWN | JULY 16, 2015 5:00 AM

SocialTwist Tell-a-Friend

After an undeniably arduous 20-month deliberation process, a deal has finally been made with Iran in regard to the country’s nuclear-development programs and, hopefully, lack thereof in the future. Despite the tireless effort placed into solidifying the deal through negotiating and renegotiating terms that both sides would agree to, President Obama has received his share of backlash from not only his own consistency but other world leaders as well. 

Part of the deal would result in the alleviation of sanctions for Iran, which could result in an increased ability to cause destabilization in the Middle East while failing to definitively keep Iran from developing nuclear weapons in the future. However, the point that needs to be taken away from the Iran nuclear deal is that some progress has finally been made. 

It may fall short of the end-all solution some critics would hope for, but it is certainly better than nothing. When contemplating the viability of negotiations at the scale of nuclear arms races and sanctioned countries still on the list of states that sponsor terrorism, certain concessions must be made. 

We must ask ourselves what exactly we are looking for and how committed we are to achieving that goal. If the goal is to subjugate Iran with diplomacy alone, it will more than likely take much longer to get Iran to agree to such terms. If the goal is to gradually ramp down the threat posed by an unregulated Iranian nuclear-development program in order to lay the foundation for more hospitable diplomatic dialogue in the future, then Obama’s deal is without a doubt a victory. 

Definitive action in this landscape of global diplomacy should be the ideal all countries and world leaders strive for regardless of scale. Even the most limited progress is worth more than unending standoffs that serve to do nothing more than heighten stakes and move negotiations further from an accord. 

The status quo has become global impasses and deadlocks that culminate in increased tensions that require superfluous effort to undo and rectify. Progress won’t be made in negotiating from a place in which conciliation and compromise is not the primary objective, and the inability to come to any semblance of an agreement before now proves that.


In today's issue:





 
Privacy Policy (8/15/07) | Terms of Use (4/28/08) | Content Submission Agreement (8/23/07) | Copyright Compliance Policy (8/25/07) | RSS Terms of Use

Copyright © The Daily Iowan, All Rights Reserved.