The nuclear program suggested by Iran is a complex threat not only to the United States but also the international peace and stability. As such, stopping the nuclear test slated for 2021 requires an equally sophisticated strategy. The Iranian 2021 nuclear test poses a three-dimensional problem to the US and the globe that include their pursuit for the weapons of mass destruction, setting a center stage for terrorism, and intervening in the internal affairs of its neighbors. According to the National Security Policy Memorandum, the main priority of the US President is to ensure the safety of the American people by preventing terrorism and containing any rogue state that seeks to destabilize global peace (“National Security Policy Memorandum”). As part of the military action against nations attempting to produce Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD), the US must employ several strategies applying the instruments of power in combating the 2021 Iran nuclear test.
First, one instrument of power that I would suggest in an integrated strategy to deal with the 2021 Iranian nuclear test crisis is the diplomatic power. The US must ensure that improves its diplomatic relations with the top leadership of Iran. Communication between these two countries should improve in a bid to ensure that the Iranian leaders understand that the program they are pursuing will only lead to more harm than good not only to Iran but the rest of the world. Diplomacy would be beneficial for several reasons. First, it will ease the tension between the two states and ensure that other economic activities such as trade between the two countries continue in the wake of the crisis. Secondly, US could use as a way of gaining the allegiance of other nations in unison against nuclear tests due to the potential dangers that such WMD have on the international community (“National Security Decision Making Capstone Challenge 2021 World Summary”). The beginning of diplomatic dialogues would also prompt other world leaders to engage in the same in a bid to persuade Iran to abandon its cause failure to which it could be subjected to sanctions that would subsequently affect its people. In this recommendation, I have focused on liberalism as the international relations tenet of choice.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Liberalism emphasizes that military prowess is not the only form of power. Other factors such as economic and social aspects matter too (Viotti, & Kauppi, 2014). Through international organizations and rules, corporation, prosperity, and trust are enhanced. Therefore, the use of dialogue as a means of preventing the 2021 Iran nuclear crisis offers the leadership of the country the view that it is not only through a military power that countries can gain dominance. Through diplomacy, the leaders can also appreciate that they risk losing other means of power namely economic and social as they continue to pursue a cause that is against the beliefs of the international community.
Secondly, the other instrument of national power that I would suggest in the wake of Iran's nuclear test crisis is the economic instrument. It is critical to note that Iran depends not only on the US but other countries in the international community to sell its products. Iran produces large amounts of agricultural products which it relies on nations in Europe and America to consume. Thereby, Iran depends on it's the global community for economic success, part of which it uses to further its nuclear tests. Therefore, the US can utilize the economic instrument to deal with Iran in two ways. First, it will put its citizen's in jeopardy by imposing sanctions on it, and secondly, the country will find it increasingly difficult to facilitate the funding of the nuclear project (“National Security Decision Making Capstone Challenge 2021”). World Summary since the US is a strong business partner for many people in the nations in the world; it could effectively utilize its position in advising nations to refrain from trading with Iran. The US President, for instance, supports the European sanctions on Iran as a way of countering what her terms as "malign activity" in the region. Iran has a robust oil-based economy which it requires nations across the globe to consume through imports. As such, economic sanctions by America and her allies would spell doom on its nuclear program hence causing the leadership of the country to reconsider their positions.
Realism is the international relation philosophy that informs my choice of the use of the economic instrument as a way of combating Iran's 2021 nuclear test crisis. Viotti, & Kauppi, (2014) asserted that realism emphasizes that the primary factor that motivates many nations are the national interests. States focus on two vital elements that include territorial integrity and political autonomy. Part of the reason why Iran is focused on pursuing its 2021 WMD activities is that it wants to protect its territorial integrity and political independence. However, it has its national interest embedded in its need to secure the welfare of the people. Therefore, it must remain concerned with its economic needs that stem from its involvement in international trade with other partners. Thus, economic sanctions by the US will adequately mitigate the nuclear threat schedule for 2021.
However, if all these recommendations do not prove helpful, the third instrument of power that I would suggest is military. The US is always determined to use the military instrument as a way of reinforcing the national security goals. It uses force in a bid to compel its adversary to comply with their security objectives. The US considers WMD as a threat to both the American people and the world population. It also remains committed to the external security and stresses on its reluctance to allow the use of nuclear materials or any other WMD that would pose a threat to its citizens, allies, and partners (“National Security Policy Memorandum”). America has an excellent military base compared to that of Iran. One of the strategies to prevent terrorism is always taking the war to the "doorsteps" of the enemy. Military aggression would involve America sending its troops to Iran and subsequently identify the nuclear firms and destroy them before reaching their completion. However, this will result in a military war between the two countries, something that America must be willing and ready to fight. Secondly, military aggression would receive support from public opinion because it would be in the best interest of the world.
The international that would best describe this recommendation is constructivism. Constructivists view international relations as social constructs that stem the ongoing processes and interactions (Viotti, & Kauppi, 2014). Shared ideas mainly shape the human association. Critical to note is that the nuclear weapon poses a threat to the entire world. As such, Americans would draw their decision to engage in a military war as a result of the shared views regarding the inappropriateness of the program. People have a negative construction regarding the nuclear weapons, and view it as a threat to existence. As such, they would support anything, including war as a means of countering the vice.
In conclusion, the three instruments of power recommended for the Iran 2021 nuclear test crisis include diplomacy, economic, and military instruments. The primary role of the American government is to protect her citizens, partners, and allies from security threats posed by WMD. It is in these regards that America must begin by talks, followed by sanctions, and if these two cannot work, it would, therefore, require military aggression as a last resort.
References
National Security Decision Making Capstone Challenge 2021 World Summary file:///C:/Users/eric/Downloads/National_Security_Decision_Making_Capestone_Challenge_2021_World_Summary%20(1).pdf
National Security Policy Memorandum file:///C:/Users/eric/Downloads/National_Security_Policy_Memorandum_2021_(NSPM-1).pdf
Viotti, P. R., & Kauppi, M. V. (2014). International Relations Theory . Harlow: Pearson.
