The events surrounding the meetings between President of North Korea Kim Jong-an and President of the United States Donald Tramp reveal a crisis in US diplomacy in arms raisings. The Trump government does not have a coherent strategy that reflects the main tenets of the talks. Interested in showing Tramp and saying that I’m, for example, more serious than Barack Obama, has made American diplomacy difficult. The extreme hardline advisers who want to take the gesture make the situation worse off.
One of the casualties is the US policy toward Iran. The talk of Pompeo on May 21 was a creepy tongue that blames the green light. In his talk about Pompeo’s distortions, he is a cover for a policy of forcing Tehran to accept the “new” agreement. Although he knows that no Iranian authorities accept this agreement. His devastating threats poke America’s nuclear diplomacy.
US Nuclear Non-Proliferation Diplomacy: Three Different Models
To fully understand the story of why Pompeo is trying to deceive and accept his wishes, it’s good to summarize the three global models of coping with the challenges of proliferation. An issue that has played a role in international diplomacy over the past two decades.
The first model: If a country is weakly military, it does not count as a serious nuclear threat and it depends on international trade to survive its economy, it may not seek nuclear weapons and is committed to the United States to maintain Helping the economy of the country and not forcing them to change the regime. Muammar Gaddafi accepted the model for Libya before assassinating NATO forces in 2011.
Second model: Although not final, North Korea’s model means that a regional power reduces its nuclear weapons, but does not destroy it all. Instead, the United States and its allies take sanctions, improve international trade and reduce their military presence and accept the regime’s political survival. This model of agreement follows from the fact that North Korea has made nuclear weapons with a warhead so that Pyongyang could respond to attacks with a nuclear bomb. Paradoxically, this situation of “total bilateral destruction” can lead to an agreement – because any military action will result in the deaths of millions of people. The option to go ahead is to choose between creating an agreement or continuing a constant conflict and entering a dangerous game that is unclear whether it is a disaster or a victory.
The third model, Iran’s model, is based on Iran’s decision of 2003 to stop any attempt to build a nuclear weapon system. An issue that the US intelligence agencies also agree with. Most likely, the Iranian authorities really did so because they knew that building such a system would not be possible for an atom bomb. Any attempt could have been accompanied by the threat of US-Israeli military attacks. Instead of making what some experts call a “family of bombs,” Tehran expanded its nuclear enrichment, but did not take all the necessary steps to continue the North Korea, including a bomb test. It seems that they wanted to show that Iran was collecting enough uranium to build an atomic bomb, which was followed by an agreement: a severe reduction in internationally-enriched uranium, instead of lifting nuclear sanctions America and Europe.
Pompeo’s distortion of the enrichment issue is a cover for key actions. In his speech, he said enrichment was unacceptable under all circumstances, and therefore called for the return of enrichment policy to be zero, which was one of the 12 demands that he made in his speeches. According to him, the United States will once again enter into negotiations with Iran that Iran will stop enriching and taking military action in the region.
US policy on nuclear proliferation has failed
In fact, the US government does not know how to force Iran to accept its demands. This is a bad news for Israel, the UAE and Saudi Arabia, because if the Trump government is incompetent, their unity with the United States will not be as beneficial to them.
Under these circumstances, US political leaders, from all sides, must strive to make the United States a model in which there is a hope of controlling the enemies and returning to the United States allies in the Middle East.
