Hot answers tagged

71

Regardless of the pros and cons of Trump leaving the agreement for, valid or not, issues with JCPOA, this is eroding international trust in the US's capacity to agree to something and then to stick to that agreement. i.e. governments which sign an agreement * with the US are not assured that the US will stick to its end of the bargain, thus making it less ...


70

"Death to <whatever>" is to some extent one of those ritualised phrases whose actual meaning is separate from the literal meaning of the phrase. It is a statement of disapproval that might be better translated as "Down with America", as a more equivalent English phrase. In the middle of 2021, there were plenty of demonstrations with ...


51

It's difficult to answer this in a comprehensive fashion, but generally I think the answer is (a qualified) 'no'. E.g. Freedom House: The Islamic Republic of Iran holds elections regularly, but they fall short of democratic standards due in part to the influence of the hard-line Guardian Council, an unelected body that disqualifies all candidates it deems ...


48

(This is mostly a repost of my answer to the now deleted question.) Iranian President Rouhani is a moderate (by Iranian standards) who took a risk signing the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) with the US, the EU, and others. Let's look at some background on the deal first: From the Iranian standpoint, the deal made sense because it provided ...


46

The US relationship with Pakistan is complicated, but for decades it was viewed as an ally. In the 1970's and 80's, India was somewhat friendly towards the Soviet Union (while remaining nonaligned). That encouraged a relationship between Pakistan and the US. After India developed a nuclear weapon, the US (as I understand it) looked the other way while ...


44

"What do we mean from saying death to America?" This is my brief answer as an Iranian. "Death to America" slogan is (or at least turned into) a kind of sign of dedication (to Iran) among the Iranians, it doesn't mean to conquer Washington as some folks once interpreted, it means that "America! we disagree with your wars, crimes, ...


26

What they mean by "death to" is basically "screw you" or "screw that." When the Matt Damon character in Good Will Hunting explains why he chose what seemed to be the most damaging of choices to be beaten with by an abusive foster-parent, he explained it like this: Will Hunting: He used to just put a belt, a stick, and a wrench ...


25

To quote UK Essays. (November 2018). Geopolitical Position Of Pakistan History Essay, " Pakistan has a significant geopolitical position as it is situated in a region that is of high grandness due to its political, economic, and strategic position. " The primary reasons for the incentives that Pakistan enjoys from the US despite the repeated ...


20

In addition to the answer from Italian Philosophers 4 Monica, the US entered a wide, international agreement. According to most experts, Iran largely stuck to their side of the deal until the US left. The deal wasn't all that ex-President Trump might have hoped for, but it was the international framework. Then the US left and tried to make other countries go ...


19

The complete proposal was presented in an annex to a letter from Iran's permanent representative to the UN Secretary-General. The letter and annex are hosted on the UN's website with document number S/2019/862. The letter reads: It is a source of grave concern that, after more than seven decades, the question of Palestine is still unresolved and the ...


17

I guess it depends which Iranians are asked and when, e.g. Wikipedia says (citing the NYT): On 8 February 2019, [Supreme Leader] Ali Khamenei stated "Death to America means death to Trump, Bolton and Pompeo. We criticize American politicians who are managing that country. Iranian nation are not against American people." but also a somewhat less ...


14

This question seems to assume that 1) Iran is a defenceless nation where nobody has guns. And 2) that the UK government considers this to be a top priority. The comparisons with Qasem Soleimani is very weak. He was assassinated in an unmanned drone strike in Iraq, where the US military has full license to operate and had total air-superiority. There's a ...


14

Because the Iran Nuclear Deal was a landmark act of diplomacy, the culmination of significant negotiation with one of the most politically-isolated nations in the world. It was applauded within Washington, D.C. by foreign-policy experts. The JPCOA wasn't a political issue; it was a success by several major counts. To be certain, not every diplomat, think-...


14

Just so it's said, from the political science perspective Trump's actions were (as best anyone can tell) capricious and arbitrary. Trump didn't seem interested in whether the pact was working, what it might be accomplishing, what its greater goals might be, how much work went into it, or what Iran or our allies thought about it. He declared it 'bad' for ...


12

Even if the impression is sometimes to the contrary, the US does not go around invading other countries on a whim. The US has a lengthy history of trying to influence Iranian affairs. This spectacularly backfired in 1979 and contributed to the Islamic revolution. (It would be hubris to say it caused the revolution.) So the US decided to provide limited ...


10

Executive actions can be changed by Biden without consulting Congress. So, for example the restrictions on travel from mainly Muslim countries was done by executive order. This order can be reversed on Jan 20th. Legislation passed in the last four years can't be repealed except by Congress, and repeal bills can be filibustered in the Senate. So, for example ...


8

It is extremely difficult as a practical matter to invade a country and rescue someone if the country isn't already in chaos due to a war or revolution in progress. It would also considered an act of war to do so, that could escalate the situation out of control, and at a minimum might result in retaliatory action against Commonwealth citizens in Iran in the ...


7

At the moment, no. As part of the 2015 JCPOA the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) did conduct inspections of Iranian nuclear facilities, including unannounced snap inspections. Since Trump pulled out of the agreement and reimposed sanctions Iran has been moving away from the conditions of the agreement. As part of that, in February Iran came to an ...


7

The Ayatollah Khamenei, also the Supreme Leader of Iran, as reported by CNN, has said in a speech to university students six years aho: The slogan 'death to America' is backed by reason and wisdom. And it goes without saying that the slogan does not mean death to the American nation. This slogan means death to US policies, death to arrogance [...] and this ...


6

There are 2 aspects to the questions - why didn't the US invade Iran, and are those missiles a significant hindrance? The missiles? Doubt it. They'd have to target fixed targets, like airfields. Yes, they could, but those would be defended. If the US has credible plans to take on Russia or China in a hot war, Iran's missiles would not be a tactical game ...


6

A "managed democracy" is not democracy. At all. It may maintain an image of a democracy (e.g. run elections) in order to get some kind of international recognition as being more or less democratic, but it completely lacks any of the proposed benefits of a democracy. Like, say, government acceptable for a significant part of the population.


5

There are many analysts who call Iran a dictatorship while many others call it democratic. So when going by experts' opinions it's almost to each their own! By Western definitions the answer is a clear no. But the current constitution was drafted by the parliament and approved by the citizens with overwhelming support during a referendum. The power wasn't ...


4

Iran is a fascinating study. The answer is "no", but it is a question which deserves more than a binary answer. Western powers for various reasons of self-interest, recent history and regional alliances seek to suppress Iran, so the impression of Iran is biased. The Western implementation of democracy is an evolving compromise between elites and ...


4

Maybe Operation Eagle Claw will refresh your memory? While seductive in theory, for clear-cut cases of abuse, these kinds of rescue mission are mostly impractical against a country that is prepared for it. The hostage has a good chance of getting killed. Or at least moved out. The risk of failure in a country with a functioning military is high. It can ...


4

One downside is that a regional war between Israel and Iran is likely to escalate to include other countries and military organizations in the region: Hezbollah - the Lebanese political party and military organization - is considered the Iranian local henchman. It will most certainly respond to an Israeli military initiative against Iran. This will prompt ...


4

There are many reasons why going to war is a bad idea in general: starting a war is easy but ending it is hard. There are several examples in the past few decades showing that even vastly superior military power does not guarantee a good outcome for the attacking country, e.g. Afghanistan, Yemen. The main problem is: what would be the goal of this war? Even ...


3

It is completely normal that the press is informed of criminal charges before there is a final verdict. How the international press deals with it depends on the reputation of the legal system in question, and despite the hits it took during the previous presidency, the US is still considered a credible source of information. Compare this BBC report on Iran ...


3

While the actual motives of the decisionmakers involved cannot be known with certainty, there are several factors that almost certainly contributed to the choices made regarding the U.S. stance towards Iran. Iran's military presents a credible threat to the lives of U.S. servicemembers. Although staggering differences in capacity exist between the ...


3

In any geography textbook Iran is classified as a Theocracy. It is a state where the religion is more important than the secularity in the executive/legislative, administrative and judiciary systems. They are actually a democracy, they have elections, but the thing is that the Ayatollah, the religious leader, have more power than the democratically elected ...


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible