Despite evident problems that caused the US removal from the treaty, and the consequences of the reintroduction of “secondary” sanctions against Iran on the currency, following the rise of Iran's unemployment rate to 13.8% and inflation rate to 55% in 2018, the agreement overall has to be considered ad a successful agreement.Cordesman, Anthony H., Iran and the United States: The Nuclear Issue. MIDDLE EAST POLICY, VOL. XV, NO. 1, SPRING 2008 [access: 10 May 2020] It showed that, despite the different understandings the topic and the opposite considerations of Iran as threat, Russia and the US agreed on finding a common solution.

The reason why I do not consider the US withdraw from the agreement as a total “defeat” of the deal is because there are many other factors not related to nuclear issues influencing the bad conduct of the events. By the simple analysis of the points that the US mentioned as violation of the deal, such as the stop funding the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps, Hezbollah, and other terrorist groups, or the expansion of Iran's influence in Iraq and Syria, or the failure to remote Iranian influence in Lebanon, it can be easily observed that the all the accusations are related to the conflictual relationship between US and Iran in general; they are all related to the US influence in the Middle East. The problem was not the deal itself, but the nature of the confrontation that we previously analysed. International theorists attribute Trump's removal of the US from the agreement a coherent move of his campaign rhetoric, based on pressures on US Middle Eastern allies and elimination of past administration moves. This shows how the US are not very interested in specific terms of the deal, but rather the possibility of regime-change within Iran. Fadaie S., Contending theories: realism and liberalism in the nuclear twenty-first century, International Relations Theory, 5 December 2018 [available at:https://blogs.ubc.ca/shakiba/2018/12/05/contending-theories-realism-and-liberalism-in-the-nuclear-twenty-first-century/ ] [access: 23 May 2020]

3.5 Reasons behind Nuclear Iran

In the previous sections we discussed the reasons why the US and Russia wanted to limit Iran's nuclear power. However, I think it is important, in the light of my analysis, to understand why Iran wanted to develop this power, because it will put in a brighter light some aspects of the relationship with the US and for the last considerations. According to some authors from the realist theory, the reason behind the nuclear Iran is a strong insecurity and fear for the US as super power in the Middle East. The realist Mearsheimer considered survival as the “fundamental driver of state behaviour.” Mearsheimer, John J. “Nuclear Weapons and Deterrence in Europe.” International Security, vol. 9, no. 3, 1984, pp. 19-46. JSTOR, [available at: www.jstor.org/stable/2538586. ][Accessed 16 May 2020.] Neo-realists stated that states seek nuclear weapons technology in order to promote security through active means of deterrence. ibidem Iran's sense of insecurity for US expansion brought to the development of nuclear weapons e to its continuous improvement. A theorised by the realist theory, weaker powers will try to balance the strongest ones by ones with alliances - with Russia against the US, for instance - and with instruments for its security.

Conclusion

After the analysis of all these elements, this deal, in my opinion, represents a positive step between Russia and the US, since it managed to merge the two Foreign Policies towards Iran, showing the possibility of future deals. What really matter is the establishment of the agreement as a deal that saw Russia and the US, for the first time, on the same side. It managed to rise strong hopes for the peaceful resolution of other international disputes through the engagement of different stakeholders. This agreement shows a concrete and real example of negotiations, proving that international security issues, sometimes might overcome national interests, and it is still considered as one of the greatest triumphs of international peace talks ibidem. Deals can be made, despite differences. Of course the fact that US withdraw from the agreement can be seen as a failure. However, a successful agreement on nuclear issues will never be reached without a concrete reassurance from the US about its intensions, its relationship with US allies in the area and about its non-domination in the area. Moreover, it will never be reached without multilateral negotiations. Until the US will maintain this hegemonic goal in the area and Iran is worried about it, a successful deal will never be reached and a positive cooperation will never be possible. However, in the meanwhile, the JCPOA showed the possibility to find a common path for achieving international goals, such as peaceful stability.

Conclusion

This thesis aimed at analysing the American and Russian Foreign Policies towards Iran, in order to understand the relationship existing between them. The comparison of their conduct provided me with all the elements needed for answering to the main argument of my research. Despite the different interests and mode of actions, can the US and Russian foreign policies in regards to Iran match?

The examination made under the concept of cooperation internationally accepted by the community and theorised by Keohane establishes that “cooperation occurs when actors adjust their behaviour to the actual or anticipated preferences.” Keohane R., After Hegemony: Coopeartion and Discord in the World Political Economy, Princeton University Press, 1984.

The analysis of the historical events and the main goals set by the American and Russian administration lead us to identify two extremely different conducts. The US and Iran have a relationship of confrontation, because of the nature of the United States as “Great Power” and its perception of being a “Hegemony”, which led the US to adopt an aggressive conduct towards Iran, especially after the Iranian Revolution, when Washington started losing position in the Middle East. The American agenda of the 21st century made the cooperation impossible, because the national goals set were in contrast with the Iranian interests. Moreover, despite changes in the administrations, the main goal, due to “American Exceptionalism”, have not undergone significant changes. The defeat of terroristic organisation and the no-proliferation of nuclear weapons for national and international security from the American side and the Iranian support to Hezbollah and Hamas and the development of nuclear program to achieve a hegemonic power in the region made the two counties in bitter contradiction. Iran was perceived as a dangerous threat, which led to an aggressive foreign policy without possibility of improvement, unless there is a change in the adaptation to the preferences of the other country in the near future.

Russia and Iran, on the other side, have a different relationship. According to the definition of the cooperation we can conclude that there is no proper cooperation; Russia Foreign policy towards Iran consists in practical achievements of short-term interests in the area, such as marginal economic interests for the instauration of a strategic cooperation with Iran, in order to achieve long-term goal. Russia's main goal is, indeed, to regain the status of “Great Power” and reobtain prestige in the international arena. However, unlike the Iranian relationship with the US, Russia and the Islamic Republic are not in a confrontation because, although Iran is not considered nor essential issue neither a threat to be controlled, Russia can count on the Iranian necessary dependence on arms and anti-Western aid from Moscow. This allows Russian to adopt an “ambiguous diplomacy”, in order to be considered a negotiator in the international multipolar system, leaving open the possibility of authentic cooperation.

The examination of the two policies and the comparison of the main Russian and American goals and interests evidenced significant contrast, making difficult any cooperation and possibility to set common objectives. However, despite the different approached that the two powers had towards Iran - due to the different national interests and goals - the Russian and American foreign policies have found a common ground with one of the most debated topic of the current international politics, the nuclear issue. In particular, they managed to agree on the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, a historic achievement designed to ensure that Iran's nuclear programme will be exclusively peaceful and for energy needs in return for UN, EU and US nuclear-related sanctions relief. The nuclear issue, indeed, represented the opportunity for Russia to regain prestige on global level and for the US an achievement of one of the main goals of his agenda, limiting Iran's nuclear empowerment and ensuring national and international security. Despite the Trump's administration withdraw from the deal and the failure of the agreement, it can still be considered as a great achievement. The failure of the deal, indeed, is related to the controversial nature of the relationship between the US and Iran and it is not directly related to nuclear issues. In my opinion, the only way to have a stable agreement that last over time is linked to a change in American strategy. The US should reassure Iran about its intention, about its relationship with US allies in the Middle Eastern region and about the negotiation that will be held in a multilateral system. Until there is this conflictual relationship due to hegemonic threats, a positive relationship on different issues cannot be possible. Until the US has the goal, as theorised by realist theories, to be a hegemonic power in the region, cooperation will never be achieved. However, this agreement demonstrated that US and Russian foreign policies can match for common international interests, rise strong hopes for the peaceful resolution.

Bibliography

Ahamed, Nick. “From Isolationism to Interventionism and Isolated Interventionism,” The Standford Daily, 4 December 2013, [available https://www.stanforddaily.com/2013/12/04/from-isolationism-to-interventionism-and-isolated-interventionism/] [access: 14 April 2020]

Akram, Iqra Mobeen. “US Foreign Policy in the Middle East: The case for continuity.” Insight Turkey. 2018, Vol. 20 Issue 4. http://library.kent.ac.uk.chain.kent.ac.uk/cgi [access: 16 April 2020]

Atlas Terry and Kelsey Davenport, Trump Challenges Europeans Over Iran Deal, Arms Control Association, Academic Journal, October 2018. [available at: https://www.armscontrol.org/act/2018-10/news/trump-challenges-europeans-over-iran-deal ][access: 12 May 2020]

Aras, Bulent and Цzbay, Fatih. “The limits of the Russian-Iranian strategic alliance: its history and geopolitics, and the nuclear issue”, Korean Journal of Defense Analysis, Vol. 20, No. 1, 2008, 56.

Barylski, V. Robert. “The Russian Federation and Islamic Crescent,” Europe - Asia Studies, Vol. 46, No. 3, 1994.

Beall, Christopher. “The Emerging Investment Landscape of Post-Sanctions Iran: Opportunities, Risks, and Implications on US Foreign Policy, "Fordham International Law Journal 39, no. 4, April 2016, 839-1022.

Benli Altunэs?эk, Meliha. “The Middle East in the Aftermath of September 11 Attacks,” Foreign Policy, Vol. 27, No. 3-4, 2001

Boese, Wade. “Congress Levies Accusations on Gore-Chernomyrdin Deal”, Arms Control Association, November 2000, [https://www.armscontrol.org/act/2000-11/iran-nuclear-briefs/congress-levies-accusations-gore-chernomyrdin-deal] [access: 16 May 2020]

Burns Nathan L., and Sadri, Houman A., “Russia, Iran, and Strategic Cooperation in the Caspian Region,” Paper presented to the 49th Annual ISA Convention San Francisco, 28 March 2008. [Available at: http://www.allacademic.com//meta/p_mla_apa_research_citation/2/5/3/9/0/pages253904/p253904- 1.php ][accessed on 16 May 2020]

Cantwell, Douglas, The ETF and the Legality of U.S. Intervention in Syria under International Law. International Law: LOAC. Lawfare. 28 March 2016,[available at: https://www.lawfareblog.com/etf-and-legality-us-intervention-syria-under-international-law ] [access: 29 May 2020]

Cimbala, Stephen J. “Nuclear Proliferation in the Twenty-First Century: Realism, Rationality, or Uncertainty?” Strategic Studies Quarterly, vol. 11, no. 1, 2017, pp. 129-146. JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/26271593. Accessed 22 May 2020.

Cleveland William and Bunton Martin. “A history of the modern Middle East,” Routledge, New York, Sixth Edition.

Cordesman, Anthony H., Iran and the United States: The Nuclear Issue. MIDDLE EAST POLICY, VOL. XV, NO. 1, SPRING 2008 [access: 10 May 2020]

Crabb, Cecil, V., “Doctrines of the American foreign policy”, Baton Rouge, Louisiana State University Press, 1982.

Di Nolfo, Ennio. “Dagli Imperi militari agli Imperi tecnologici. La politica internazionale dal XX secolo ad oggi.” Transl. “From military to technological empires. The international Politics of the XX century up to now”. Editori Laterza ed. 13, 2008.

Dinpajouh Mona, Russian Foreign Policy Towards Iran Under Vladimir Putin: 2000-2008, Master Dissertation, July 2009.

EKЮЭ Muharrem, Regional Hegemony Quests in the Middle East from the Balance of Power System to the Balance of Proxy Wars: Turkey as Balancing Power for the Iran - Saudi Rivalry, Journal of Gazi, Academic View. Winter2017, Vol. 11 Issue 21, p133-156. 24p. [access: 28 March 2020]

Fadaie S., Contending theories: realism and liberalism in the nuclear twenty-first century, International Relations Theory, 5 December 2018 [available at:https://blogs.ubc.ca/shakiba/2018/12/05/contending-theories-realism-and-liberalism-in-the-nuclear-twenty-first-century/ ] [access: 23 May 2020]

Freedman Robert, O., “Russian Policy Toward the Middle East Under Putin: The Impact of 9/11 and The War in Iraq”, Alternatives, Vol. 2, No. 2, Summer 2003, [available at: http://www.alternativesjournal.net/volume2/number2/putin.htm] [accessed on 12 March 2008]

Freire, Maria, R., Key Players and Regional Dynamics in Eurasia, The Return of the 'Great Game'

Palgrave Macmillan Limited, 20 October 2010. [Available at: https://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/kentuk/detail.action?docID=652410#] [access: 13 April 2020].

Garfinkle, Adam. “Redefining U.S. Interests in the Middle East”, Middle East Papers, 9 October 2008, [available at : http://blogs.harvard.edu/mesh/files/2008/10/interests-garfinkle.pdf; ] [access: 15 April 2020]

Gerson, Michael. To gain leverage in Iran, the U.S. Needs to Go Green, Washington Post, Dec. 2, 2009, [available at: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/ 12/01 /AR2009120103283.html] [access: 15 April 2020]

Hodgson, Godfrey, The Myth of American Exceptionalism, Yale University Press, 1 December 2009. [available at: https://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/kentuk/reader.action?docID=3420632&ppg=19 ] [access: 10 April 2020]

A History of Iran's Nuclear Program, Iran Watch, 9 August 2016 [available at: https://www.iranwatch.org/our-publications/weapon-program-background-report/history-irans-nuclear-program#1b] [access: 21 May 2020]

Ikenberry, John. G., America's Liberal Grand Strategy: Democracy and National Security in the Post-War Era. In M. Cox, G. J. Ikenberry, and T. Inoguchi (Eds.), American Democracy Promotion: Impulses, Strategies, and Impacts. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 2000.

Jafarzadeh, Alireza. “The Iran Threat: President Ahmadinejad and the Coming Nuclear Crisis”. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2007.

Janice J. Terry, US Foreign Policy in the Middle East the role of lobbies and special interest groups. Pluto Press 2005 p. 68. E-BOOK [https://www-theacademiclibrary-com.chain.kent.ac.uk/title_display.cfm?CFID=8058030&CFTOKEN=59922944]

Jenkins, R. Churchill: A biography. New York, NY: Plume. 2001.

Jones, Steve. "Understanding Soft Power in US Foreign Policy." ThoughtCo. https://www.thoughtco.com/soft-power-in-u-s-foreign-policy-3310359 (accessed May 25, 2020).

JCPOA Implementation, US Department of the Treasury 14 July 2015, [available at: http://vsudw.artistpalace.icu/hyllkjit/463af8b0/?n=1373583488] [access: 23 April 2020].

Katz, Mark, N. “Russian-Iranian Relations in the Putin Era”, Demokratizatsiya, Vol. 10, No. 1, Winter 2002.

Katz Mark, N. “Russia and Iran”, Middle East Policy, Vol. 10, No. 3, Fall 2012.

Keohane, Robert. “After Hegemony: Cooperation and Discord in the World Political Economy”. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1984.

Keylor, William R. “Un mondo di nazioni, L'ordine Internazionale dal 1945.” Ed. Guerini Scientifica, 2014. Transl. A world of nations, The international world order after the 1945. Ed. Guerini Scientifica, 2014. P. 405.

Malone D., M., Khong, F.,Y., Unilateralism and U.S. Foreign Policy: International Perspectives, Boulder: Lynne Rienner Publishers, ed. 2003

McDougall, W., A., The Iranian Revolution, Enciclopaediae Britannica , Enciclopaediae Britannica Inc. 9 Jan 2020 [available at: https://www.britannica.com/topic/20th-century-international-relations-2085155/The-Iranian-revolution#ref305093 ][access: 12 April 2020]

Mearsheimer, John J. “Nuclear Weapons and Deterrence in Europe.” International Security, vol. 9, no. 3, 1984, pp. 19-46. JSTOR, [available at: www.jstor.org/stable/2538586. ][Accessed 31 May 2020.]

Mehdi, Fakheri. Iran nuclear deal: from nationalism to diplomacy, Asian Education and Development Studies, Academic Journal, 2017, Vol. 6, Issue 1, pp. 2-16. [Access: 6 April 2020]

Mikhailov V. Amrollah, R. Protocol of Negotiations, Iran Watch, 1 January, 1995, [available at: /library/government/russia/russia-protocol-negotiation-between-iran-and-russia.] [access: 11 May 2020]

Milani Mohsen, Rouhani 's Foreign Policy: How to Work with Iran's Pragmatic New President , Foreign aff., 25 June 2013, [available at: https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/iran/2013-06-25/rouhanis-foreign-policy] [ access: 3 April 2020]

Mueller, Karl P., Becca Wasser, Jeffrey Martini, and Stephen Watts, “U.S. Strategic Interests in the Middle East and Implications for the Army”. Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corporation, 2017. [https://www.rand.org/pubs/perspectives/PE265.html.] [access: 11 April 2020]

Nicolosi, Maria., Il problema del regime politico del Mar Caspio. Geopolitical Rewiev, Alpha Institute. 31 October 2016, [Available at: https://geopoliticalreview.alphainstitute.it/2016/10/31/problema-del-regime-giuridico-del-mar-caspio/] (accessed: 17 May 2020) Translation: The problem of the political regime of the Caspian Sea, Geopolitical Rewiev, Alpha Institute.

Parker, John W. Persian Dreams: Moscow and Tehran since the Fall of the Shah, Potomac Books, 15 Jan 2009, p.162-4.

Piven, B., Iran and Israel: Comparing military machines, Al Jazeera, Apr. 24, 2012, available at: [https://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/features/2012/03/2012326131343853636.html ][access: 20 April 2020]

Prifti, Bledar. Putting US Foreign Policy in a Theoretical Perspective. US Foreign Policy in the Middle East. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham, 09 Feb 2017.

Putin V. V. Speech at the meeting of ambassadors and permanent representatives of the Russian Federation. - President of Russia. Official site. July 9, 2012. [Access: http://www.kremlin.ru/events/president/news/15902] [access on: 20 May 2020]

Safdari, C. “Iran Needs Nuclear Energy, Not Weapons”, Le Monde Diplomatique, 2 November 2005, [available at: http://mondediplo.com/2005/11/02iran] [access: 16 May 2020]

Schmidt, Brian, C., The debate on American Hegemony, Dialogue of Civilizations Research Institute, 13 June 2019, [https://doc-research.org/2019/06/the-debate-on-american-hegemony/] [accessed: 12 May 2020/]

Simons., Greg, “Russian public diplomacy in the 21st century: Structure, means and message”, Public Relations Review Volume 40, Issue 3, September 2014, p. 445

Speakman Cordall, S. Russian soft power places Moscow at the centre of Syria's chaos, Middle East Online, The Arab Weekly, 18 October 2018 [available at: https://middle-east-online.com/en/russian-soft-power-places-moscow-centre-syria's-chaos] [access: 24 May 2020]

The Editors of Enciclopaedia Britannica, Containment, Enciclopaedia Britannica inc. 26 March 2020, [available at: https://www.britannica.com/topic/containment-foreign-policy,][access: 12 April 2020]

The Heritage Foundation, Iran Economy, 2014 Index of Economic Freedom. [available at: https://www.heritage.org/index/country/iran][access: 20 April 2020]

Trenin, D., Russia and Iran: Historic mistrust and Contemporary Partnership. Carnagie Moscow Center 18 August 2016, [available at: https://carnegie.ru/2016/08/18/russia-and-iran-historic-mistrust-and-contemporary-partnership-pub-64365] [accessed: 21 May 2020]

Remarks by President Trump on the Join Comprehensive Plan of Action, Foreign Policy, 8 May 2018. Available at: [https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefings-statements/remarks-president-trump-joint-comprehensive-plan-action/]

Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), April 22,?1970, [available at: https://www.iaea.org/topics/non-proliferation-treaty] [access: 13 May 2020]

Walt, S., M., Our Myopic Approach to Iran, Foreign Policy, 26 March 2013, [available at: https://foreignpolicy.com/2013/03/26/our-myopic-approach-to-iran/ ] [ access: 3 April 2020]

Walt, S., M., “On Iran, Try Back scratching, Not Blackmail,” Foreign Policy, 22 February 2013., [available at: https://foreignpolicy.com/2013/02/22/on-iran-try-backscratching-not-blackmail/ ] [access: 3 April 2020]

Wheeler, Eric, Desai Michael, “Iran and Russia: A Partnership in the making”. Middle East Institute, 12 September 2016, [available at: https://www.mei.edu/publications/iran-and-russia-partnership-making] [access: 11 May 2020]

Yuryeva, Darya. "Corridor for Ahmadinejad," Rossiyskaya gazeta Online, Moscow, 17 June 2009

Размещено на Allbest.ru