.jpg)
Iran in Dilemma
WASHINGTON, Nov. 3 — The World Bank, newly caught up in the Bush administration’s campaign against Iran, has had to suspend payments for earthquake relief, sanitation and other projects there in response to new American sanctions on leading Iranian banks, World Bank officials say. American officials said they hoped that the decision by the World Bank would increase pressure on Iran.
"New sanctions are against Iran's Revolutionary Guard Corps and some Iranian banks, accusing them of supporting terrorism and providing banking services to support nuclear activities.The sanctions blacklist 22 Iranian government agencies, three state-owned banks, as well as individuals, in an attempt to force Tehran to stop its nuclear programme and control its "terrorist" activities."
These new sanctions can be approached from two perspectives: sanctions as an alternative way to avoid military engagement; this means at least for now United States is not going to war with Iran, or as a process which prepares the stage for more sever actions, e.g. military action, as it did happen in Iraq. But to what extend these sanctions are going to be effective? Some consider these sanctions to be unilateral step by America which lacks collective action by other countries. America have maintained its sanctions against Iran since Islamic Revolution in 1979, and Iranians refer to this repeatedly to show that these sanctions are not going to be effective . So America hopes to persuade his European allies and other important countries such as China and Russia to join him to reach a consensus, which will set the stage for a resolution in Security Council in a third round of UN sanctions. These sanctions might have serious consequences for Iran. These sanctions will also have some internal consequences : it would lead to more unemployment and inflation and rise dissatisfaction among ordinary people. It seems that Iranians have to reconsider their policies. This is Iran's dilemma: for years they have propaganda that they are not after weapons of mass destruction and want it for peaceful purposes, that nuclear energy is necessary for Iran's future development. So they have prepared public opinion for this purpose and any retract or retreat is sign of country's weakness.
WASHINGTON, Nov. 3 — The World Bank, newly caught up in the Bush administration’s campaign against Iran, has had to suspend payments for earthquake relief, sanitation and other projects there in response to new American sanctions on leading Iranian banks, World Bank officials say. American officials said they hoped that the decision by the World Bank would increase pressure on Iran.
"New sanctions are against Iran's Revolutionary Guard Corps and some Iranian banks, accusing them of supporting terrorism and providing banking services to support nuclear activities.The sanctions blacklist 22 Iranian government agencies, three state-owned banks, as well as individuals, in an attempt to force Tehran to stop its nuclear programme and control its "terrorist" activities."
These new sanctions can be approached from two perspectives: sanctions as an alternative way to avoid military engagement; this means at least for now United States is not going to war with Iran, or as a process which prepares the stage for more sever actions, e.g. military action, as it did happen in Iraq. But to what extend these sanctions are going to be effective? Some consider these sanctions to be unilateral step by America which lacks collective action by other countries. America have maintained its sanctions against Iran since Islamic Revolution in 1979, and Iranians refer to this repeatedly to show that these sanctions are not going to be effective . So America hopes to persuade his European allies and other important countries such as China and Russia to join him to reach a consensus, which will set the stage for a resolution in Security Council in a third round of UN sanctions. These sanctions might have serious consequences for Iran. These sanctions will also have some internal consequences : it would lead to more unemployment and inflation and rise dissatisfaction among ordinary people. It seems that Iranians have to reconsider their policies. This is Iran's dilemma: for years they have propaganda that they are not after weapons of mass destruction and want it for peaceful purposes, that nuclear energy is necessary for Iran's future development. So they have prepared public opinion for this purpose and any retract or retreat is sign of country's weakness.
No comments:
Post a Comment