GLOBALCONVERSATIONSIssue 1 September, 2015
September 26th: United Nations International Day for the Total Elimination of Nuclear Weapons 2 MGA students take different looks at the current state of a nuclear world.
THE FIRST OFFICIAL
ISSUE!
Since the conclusion of Iran nuclear talks and the formation of the agreement known as Joint Com-prehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), various groups
and institutions began campaigning against this deal. These groups have used different arguments to convince the public about the dangers and flaws of JCPOA. Among these arguments was a comparison between this deal and the nuclear deal made by Clinton administration with North Korea which failed to prevent the Southeast Asian country from acquiring nuclear weapons. Of course, Iran and North Korea are completely different cases and these groups, in an apparently purposeful manner, avoid men-tioning it. Even though the Bush administration’s role in the failure of the North Korea deal should not be discount-ed, a comparison, strictly between Iran and North Korea, shows that various factors completely distinguish these two cases from one another. Iran, due its internal dynam-ics, geopolitics, and economy, has many more incentives to keep its end of the bargain.
North Korea’s China
The Chinese long-standing support of North Korea was indeed a key factor in emboldening Pyeongyang
to pursue its nuclear weapons program. Without doubt, China would not have been hesitant to directly defend its Korean neighbour in the case of an American offensive. The evidence: the Korean War. There is no indication that would suggest North Korea’s strategic importance has changed for Beijing. This is not to suggest that Chi-nese leaders support Pyeongyang’s possession of nuclear weapons. Nonetheless, China will continue to ensure that
American troops will not be stationed next to its border.1 For Iran, however, things are different.
Iran, unlike North Korea, does not have the unconditional backing of a superpower. None of its neighbours are pow-erful or friendly enough to support Iran in case an Ameri-can strike takes place. Russia and China, also, are not like-ly to confront the Americans directly. Iran is not China’s North Korea nor is it Russia’s Ukraine. The powers of the eastern bloc will most likely rely only on supplying Iran with weapons and arms, similar to the Vietnam War, in the case of such confrontation.
Due to this, Tehran cannot be as assured as Pyongyang about the US’s unwillingness to exercise any form of mil-itary options. This is probably why Iran never attempted to produce nuclear weapons after being called by Presi-dent Bush a part of the “axis of evil”, completely contrary to what North Koreans did when facing a similar circum-stance. It appears that Iran sees its regional hegemony and deterrence in increasing its influence across the Middle East instead of acquiring nuclear weapons.
Geopolitics of the Middle East and the Iranian goal
In recent years, and especially after the fall of Saddam Hussein, Iran has been successful in increasing its in-
fluence across the Middle East.2 So far, such increase has been mainly due to its support of various Shia groups and militias within the region. However, Iran has taken other measures which suggest that its goal is not only to strengthen the so-called Shia crescent but to establish itself
The Iran Deal: nOT anOTher nOrTh KOrea Deal
Written by Kei ZamaninoorMiddle East correspondent
https://www.flickr.com/photos/statephotos/16389773974
as the rightful regional hegemon that can bring stability to the Middle East. Such goal cannot be achieved if the Shia country is dragged into a war with the U.S.
It is no secret that Iran has been supporting its allies in Syr-ia and Iraq against ISIL and other Sunni groups. Iran’s state media has been open about the involvement of IRGC Gen-eral Qasim Soleimani in supervising, training, and arming Shia militias. What is important, however, is that Iran is justifying its involvement by claiming that these actions are for defeating extremists and terrorists in the region. This is an attempt by Iran to show its goals are aligned with those of the international community.
Furthermore, Iran’s Foreign Ministry has been active in finding a political solution for the Syrian crisis. Some Ira-nian officials, also, have expressed their readiness to begin negotiations with the U.S. and Saudi Arabia on the matter.3 By using its political arm, Iran is displaying itself as the re-gional power that can bring all sides with different views together and reach a political solution for the existing problems. Regardless of its success, Iran wants to showcase that it has the political willingness and necessary regional influence to be the hegemon of the region. Tehran, how-ever, cannot achieve this goal without ensuring stability at home. An American attack will jeopardize achieving such ambition. If Iran is able increase its influence, it is due to its internal stability relative to other countries in the region. Tehran’s desire to resolve the nuclear issue was also an at-tempt to guarantee the continuity of such stability by end-ing the regime of sanctions that had crippled its economy.
Open country vs. isolated country
Another issue, overlooked by the opponents, is Iran’s need of having economic relations with the world.
Unlike North Korea, Iran heavily relies on selling its oil and gas to foreign buyers. North Korea, however, is yet to show any interest in restoring its trade and political rela-tions with the world. It also has complete control over the inflow of information from other countries and the out-flow of information from itself. While the North Korean government has used the country’s economic and polit-ical isolation to maintain its legitimacy and control over its people, the Iranian government continues to depend on economic relations with other countries. If the Irani-
an regime ever obtains nuclear weapons, it would have to be prepared for facing sanctions much more severe than the ones imposed before. This would drastically destabilise Iran, especially since its economy is heavily dependent on oil and gas exports.
This issue is not limited only to the Iranian economy. Unlike North Korea, Iranians are informed about world affairs and scrutinize their government at a much larger scale. According to the World Bank statistics, 40% of Ira-nians have access to internet while this rate is 0% for North Korea.4 Also, one of the main, if not the only, reasons be-hind the election of Hassan Rouhani as president was his promise of ending this decade-long issue. Such popular movement for a major shift in a state policy is non-existent in North Korea.
Clearly, the dynamics of the Iranian society and economy make it difficult for those in charge to justify undertaking any confrontational strategies against the west. According to a recent poll conducted by the Toronto-based IranPoll, the nuclear deal is supported by 75% of Iranians5, making it even harder for the government to violate the agreement. Indeed, compared to North Korea, Iran has “many” more intensives to keep its end of the bargain as it wants to be a stable country with relations with other countries.
A long way remains
It is fair to say that no one can predict the outcome of this deal with full confidence. The JCPOA is a complex pack-
age that involves seven different countries, each with their own unique interests. Nonetheless, from an Iranian stand-point, this agreement is a highly beneficial one. Of course, the American side, at some point in the future, might scrap this agreement all together. The rhetoric adopted by all Republican presidential candidates does maintain such scenario a plausible one. But for now, this deal should be embraced as a chance for bringing more stability to an al-ready volatile Middle East and a solution for making the world safer. 1http://www.bloombergview.com/articles/2015-05-21/why-china-s-ok-with-north-korea-s-nuclear-nuttiness2 http://www.fletcherforum.org/2014/12/11/khelghat-doost/3http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2015/09/iran-ready-talk-saudi-arabia-syr-ia-150908092549115.html4 http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/IT.NET.USER.P25http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/world/iranian-support-for-nuclear-deal-re-flects-misunderstanding-poll-shows/article26263899/
Kei Zamaninoor is currently a Master of Global Affairs (MGA) Candidate at Munk School of Global Affairs, University of Toronto. He previously studied Business Administration at Schulich School of Business, York Uni-versity. His research interests include international business, international economy, Middle Eastern geopolitics, and Iranian affairs.
August 6th has been an important day throughout history. It’s the day in 1825 when Bolivia became a country; Austria-Hungary went to war with
Russia, and Serbia with Germany in 1914; African-Amer-icans were granted the right to vote by the Voting Rights Act in 1965. Yet none of these significant events have im-pacted the world as much as August 6th, 1945. At 8:15am, the American B-29, Enola Gay, dropped the 141-pound uranium atom bomb, Little Boy, on the Japanese city of Hiroshima, instantly killing nearly 80,000 people.
2015 marks 70 years since the conclusion of WWII, and in memorial of the atomic disasters, crowds flocked to Hiroshima and Nagasaki this past August. The me-morial celebration in Hiroshima lasts for the full day, from 7:30 in the morning, until long after dark. While it seems strange to call the day a celebration, that’s exactly what it was. The minute of the bombing was marked with a moment of silence, but this is one of only a few somber moments during the day. The night event may be the most famous part of the memorial, as tens of thousands of paper lanterns are decorated and floated down the river in front of the Atomic Bomb Dome to mark the number of souls that were lost to the bomb. Seeing such a majestic and beautiful sight coming out of a horrifying event like this was truly inspiring. It was a
small example of the most striking part of the memorial overall, which was the constantly repeating message of peace and hope moving forward.
The city certainly hasn’t forgotten. Beyond August, Hiroshima continues to espouse this aura of peaceful progress, with the mayor writing a letter to each head of state that tests a nuclear weapon, in order to remind them of the devastation that this kind of militarization can cause. The population has seemed to let go how-ever, of any blame or resentment that was initially felt towards the United States. While some cite the power of the US, or Japan’s role in the war as reasons not to place blame, the average Japanese resident is unlikely to censor themselves for such political purposes. It seems instead that Japan’s approach of forgiveness and forward thinking has been thorough, consistent, and effective in eliminating any harboured negative sentiment against America. Of course, Japan’s fascination with Western culture likely also aided the healing process.
While the anger appears to be gone, such a broad gen-eralization can’t be applied to the entire country. As at any major political event, the memorial had groups protesting, with particularly high numbers this year due to Prime Minister Abe’s decision to remilitarize
August 6th: the DAy the
WorlD ChAngeDWritten by Chelsea GrayGlobal Conversations Executive Producer
“When I looked around the riverbank there were 200-300 peo-ple who had been involved in demolition work. I could see the skin had peeled off their backs and was hanging from their waists.”
the country. Conversely, some very small yet vocal groups were showing support for the growing military presence, occasionally using the Hiroshima bomb-ing to demonstrate Japan’s need to defend itself from the United States. The political sentiments both for and against Japan’s current security debate were over-whelmingly eclipsed though, by the general messag-es of peace and growth throughout the day. Survivors of the bombings and current residents of Hiroshima clearly remain very connected to the events of 1945, which was made evident by the volume of people who were involved in putting on the memorial.Survivors offered their testimonials, having learned English specifically to be able to share their stories
to larger global audiences. Their passion to learn the language and teach the world was moving on its own, but their stories were powerful on an entirely different level. One man who was 14 years old when the bomb hit said he was at work near a demolition site where men were often shirtless. He retold his first memory after the bomb, “when I looked around the riverbank there were 200-300 people who had been involved in demolition work. I could see the skin had peeled off their backs and was hanging from their waists.” Another man supposed he was standing on the ash-es of his father, since his body was never found and his office was destroyed and replaced by the memorial where he was speaking. He described the people he saw when he came into the city following the blast as looking “more like ghosts than human beings.” A woman who told her story was 8 years old at the time. She saw people who were severely burned and pleading for water so she brought some from the river, ignorant of the severe radiation contamination. The water killed most of them faster than the burns and exposure, forming a guilt within her that haunted her for decades.
For many, the effects of the Hiroshima bombing lasted for decades, physically, socially and psychologically. Women especially felt pressure to hide their survivor status until their daughters were married so that they didn’t ruin marriage prospects because of potential fertility issues or birth defects. Outside of Hiroshima and Nagasaki however, even memories seemed to fade quickly. Other major Japanese cities essentially ignore the memorial days and continue their average lives. As a foreigner going to witness these events, I was lauded by my colleagues, and many said that it made them feel guilty for never having gone, despite living in Japan for their whole lives. But this apathy wasn’t unique to my workplace. It’s widespread throughout Japan, spe-
cifically among the youth, where they have started to treat the day like North American youth treat flossing; important if you remember, but you usually don’t.
As a city that has experienced such incredible trauma, it has rebuilt with strength, beauty and vibrancy. Hiroshi-ma thrives with all the life and bustle of a premiere Asian city, but that’s not always what was predicted for the city’s future. Ban-Ki Moon captured the disparity between prediction and reality in his statement at the memorial, stating, “In the months after the bombing, it was said that trees and other plants would not grow for 75 years. Now, seven decades later, this vibrant city is proof of the resil-ience of its people and a monument to the indomitable spirit of humanity. You are an inspiration to the world, which has a responsibility to honour your experience by ensuring a world free of nuclear weapons.”
And yet, the Peace Flame, which was lit a year after the attack with the promise it would burn until the last nu-clear weapon was destroyed, continues to blaze at the Hiroshima memorial, reminding the world that there is still work to be done.
Chelsea Gray is a second year Master of Global Affairs student at the Munk School of Global Affairs. Previously an intern with the World Health Organization in Japan, she is passionate about health, specifically the social determinants of health and issues that lie at the intersection between health, food and the environment. As a graduate from the University of Waterloo, she studied international development through a sustainability lens, with a focus on peace and conflict. She was able to bring all of these interests together while working in Nepal for a fair trade company, and learning to survive in the developing world.
