Potential Military Action Against Iran Case Study
To: Name and position
From: Name and position
Subject: Potential military action against Iran: Recommended actions.
Date: Complete and current date
Summary: According to the UN charter (Article 2, paragraph 4), a multilateral treaty ratified by most countries, member nations cannot use military force except when it is needed to restore peace or when it is a self-defense tactic for itself and its allies. Preventive military strikes or preemptive strikes are not allowed except when it is obvious that the other country is planning to attack as indicated by buildup of troops or enemy warships or other activities detected by surveillance technology. In case of perceived threat or any other action by Iran which calls for military action, a cost-benefit …show more content…
Political diplomacy is practiced but pressure is put constantly on the Iranian Government so that it is apparent that military force may be applied, if needed. President Obama’s speech at the Nobel Prize ceremony sums up the administration’s views-“Part of our challenge is reconciling these two seemingly irreconcilable truths—that war is sometimes necessary, and war at some level is an expression of human folly.” The recent Iran deal forged in Vienna offers US financial help to provide a boost to Iran’s economy including trade and technology and would probably lead to more chaos in the region with no checks on Iran. According to ‘The Jerusalem Post’, the US Government has raised doubts about whether military action or sanctions against Iran would be effective as the country has the capacity to rebuild any facilities which are destroyed. Peace negotiations would be better in the long …show more content…
This posed a threat to the US and also Israel. However such action is likely to result in instability in the volatile Middle East as conflict may continue and global security would be threatened. Moreover, the oil market will also be hit as supply and exports would be affected.
Recent developments in Iran: Iran has violated United Nations Security Council Resolutions to stop enrichment activity and has continued its nuclear program in secrecy. Recent news by ‘The Telegraph’ shows that Iran, along with Russia has attacked Aleppo in Syria. Also, despite a UN ban, Iran tested a medium range missile which can carry nuclear weapons. Bahrain has accused Iran of supporting terrorism. For these reasons, the American public would feel that military attack on Iran is justified but long term effects must be evaluated before taking any
From: Name and position
Subject: Potential military action against Iran: Recommended actions.
Date: Complete and current date
Summary: According to the UN charter (Article 2, paragraph 4), a multilateral treaty ratified by most countries, member nations cannot use military force except when it is needed to restore peace or when it is a self-defense tactic for itself and its allies. Preventive military strikes or preemptive strikes are not allowed except when it is obvious that the other country is planning to attack as indicated by buildup of troops or enemy warships or other activities detected by surveillance technology. In case of perceived threat or any other action by Iran which calls for military action, a cost-benefit …show more content…
Political diplomacy is practiced but pressure is put constantly on the Iranian Government so that it is apparent that military force may be applied, if needed. President Obama’s speech at the Nobel Prize ceremony sums up the administration’s views-“Part of our challenge is reconciling these two seemingly irreconcilable truths—that war is sometimes necessary, and war at some level is an expression of human folly.” The recent Iran deal forged in Vienna offers US financial help to provide a boost to Iran’s economy including trade and technology and would probably lead to more chaos in the region with no checks on Iran. According to ‘The Jerusalem Post’, the US Government has raised doubts about whether military action or sanctions against Iran would be effective as the country has the capacity to rebuild any facilities which are destroyed. Peace negotiations would be better in the long …show more content…
This posed a threat to the US and also Israel. However such action is likely to result in instability in the volatile Middle East as conflict may continue and global security would be threatened. Moreover, the oil market will also be hit as supply and exports would be affected.
Recent developments in Iran: Iran has violated United Nations Security Council Resolutions to stop enrichment activity and has continued its nuclear program in secrecy. Recent news by ‘The Telegraph’ shows that Iran, along with Russia has attacked Aleppo in Syria. Also, despite a UN ban, Iran tested a medium range missile which can carry nuclear weapons. Bahrain has accused Iran of supporting terrorism. For these reasons, the American public would feel that military attack on Iran is justified but long term effects must be evaluated before taking any