Shaming Shamima: An Unlikely Debate

by with No Comment FeaturedGlobal

Shamima Begum, to forgive or not to forgive? The request of this 19-year-old British Muslim to return to England after defecting to ISIS has sparked debate on the issues of remorse and culpability of minors for serious criminality. A martyr, a victim, a misguided youth, an accomplice to terrorism, a precedent for case law. Shamima has certainly divided opinion over how her wrongdoings should be viewed. Never in recent memory has a supporter of terrorism generated such controversy and even more surprisingly, sympathy.

Support from the public is undeniably linked to her young age. Shamima made her decision to join ISIS when she was 15 years old. A child beyond 10 years old committing any crime can still be tired and sentenced under British Law. Her decision to stay with ISIS continued past her turning 18 when she was fully capable as an adult to take criminal responsibility. Now at 19, her naivety is coincidental and unfortunate at best.

Let’s consider if this was a British boy who had been radicalized and fathered a child whilst part of ISIS. Would they be given sympathy for their regret? What we have here is a gender bias from both men and women on social media that no one is talking about. ‘She’s a victim’ ‘she was groomed’, ‘she’s traumatized.’ Were the teenage boys who defected to ISIS at the same age ever given victim status? Where was all this uproar for them? Two similar cases of British-Bangladeshi men were repatriated back to England only because of legal reasons, not on the basis of forgiveness. The same should apply to a female member of ISIS.

Having made the case that she is fully culpable for her actions, the question now is does the punishment fit the crime? The legal dilemmas here are more complex than many of us realize. Our (Head of ) Home Secretary, Sajid Javid, states his decision to revoke Shamima’s citizenship was in the interest of national security. Foreign terrorists and accomplices are also banned from entering the U.K. under the same principle. Opponents argue she has not been given a fair trial to be prosecuted and sentenced.

However, the statistics presented in Parliament last year revealed that only one in ten of all jihadists returning to the UK were prosecuted. The Director of the Centre on Radicalisation and Terrorism, Nikita Malik, has expressed concern about British laws not being robust enough to allow for prosecution in these cases. The current legal framework prohibits much of the evidence collected on terrorists abroad being admissible to court. There is the very real possibility of Shamima being free on a technicality despite her openly saying she left to join ISIS. It is therefore unfair to label Sajid Javid’s decision as purely political, xenophobic or washing hands of responsibility. Risking miscarriage of justice really is at the expense of Britain’s security if Shamima (and subsequent cases) cannot be adequately prosecuted.

The debate has since shifted to the issue of her citizenship. The ‘bloodline’ law in Bangladesh means Shamima may be a citizen there by default because of her Bangladeshi mother. Bangladesh are in the process of disputing this with the Home Office, meaning the U.K. could have illegally rendered an individual stateless. Shamima also has the right to appeal the Home Office’s decision by proving the Home Secretary acted disproportionately.

One fact remains: she admits to joining ISIS. This in itself is the definition of proscription and is illegal under the Terrorism Act 2000. It is punishable by up to 10 years in prison. If she is accepted back into the U.K, she will be tried and sentenced in accordance with those laws. An indefinite/temporary ban from re-entering the U.K. may ironically be the more lenient punishment, all things considered. Quite simply put by Sajid Navid (Home Secretary), if you back terror, there must be severe consequences. 

Similar Read: God Save the King, the Demise of a Regime 

Venezuela 2.0: The Insanity Continues

by with No Comment FeaturedGlobal

Once upon a time, Venezuela used to be the wealthiest nation in South America. Unfortunately, for years, the country has been caught in a violent downward spiral over political discontent, insane hyperinflation, food scarcity, and gaps in power and electricity. 

Three million and counting Venezuelans have left the nation in the last few years to survive. In my last take on Venezuela, I explained in detail the insanity that had taken over and the driving force (Maduro) that is pushing the nation over the edge. I want to provide an update on the situation and what you, as a reader need to know.

Two presidents?

Yes, you read it right. Asking that question in most countries would be absurd, but as of January 23rd, 2019, the question makes perfect sense in Venezuela. On this day, Juan Guaidó proclaimed himself to be the new acting president of the nation and would assume the executive branch of powers moving forward.

This move was a direct “come at me bro” to Nicolás Maduro, who had been sworn into office again just two weeks ago. As expected, good ol’Maduro did not take it kindly to someone attempting to wrest power from his hands. Going as far as to call this move a ploy from the U.S. to remove him from power. 

Why are there two presidents?

Nicolås Maduro received power directly from his socialist mentor and predecessor, Hugo Chavez. Even with the direct line of succession going to him, he only won by a thin margin of 1.6%. From the very first few months of being in office, Nicolås Maduro’s government sent the Venezuelan economy into a free fall, which led to the people of the nation to blame Maduro for the nation’s woes. 

To make people hate him even more, Maduro went as far as to stage a sham election in 2018 to cement his power for a 6-year term, which most opposition parties boycotted.

His opponents were either barred from running the election against him and fled the country in fear for their lives, or were merely put into jail to remove the threat of Maduro losing completely.

How is this all coming together now?  

After being re-elected to a second term in elections in May 2018, Mr. Maduro announced in a very odd way that he would serve out his remaining first term and only then be sworn in for a second term on January 10th. It was because of this swearing-in process that the opposition got its second wind to resist and oppose. The national assembly states that because of Mr. Maduro going through some ridiculous process of becoming president, that his election was not fair, which currently makes Mr. Maduro a dictator of sorts to the people of Venezuela.

This is the narrative that is being pushed forth specifically by Juan Guaidó. Citing the articles of the Venezuelan constitution 233, and 333, the legislative body declared that in such cases like the current one, requires for the national assembly to take over as acting president hence why Juan Guaidó declared himself as president on January 23, 2019.

How is the rest of the world taking it so far? 

Well, our great commander In-Chief has officially recognized Juan Guaidó as the legitimate president of Venezuela, literally moments after Juan stated he would be taking on the role of acting president. Of course, that sparked a response from Mr. Maduro, who once again started with the same rhetoric that the U.S. government was out to get him. In an idiotic attempt to show some measure of control, Mr. Maduro broke off ties with the U.S and told the diplomats they had 72 hours to leave, which he abandoned three days later stating that each country should keep an “interest-section” open in their respective capitals.

What’s going to happen now?

Well, as of now Juan Guaidó is urging the people of Venezuela to keep protesting and resisting until the nation is liberated. He hopes with the majority of western powers on his side, and for his cause, he will be able to take control completely and bring Venezuela back from the edges of total ruin. Though he is president of the national assembly, this body of the government was rendered powerless in 2017 by the creation of the National Constituent Assembly.

Currently, the military is the only force that can indeed make an impact and break the stalemate between Maduro and Guaidó. Though currently, they are loyal to Maduro, because of consistent pay raises and reasonably good treatment of the armed forces. Following the election on Jan 23, top Venezuelan commanders tweeted their support for Maduro, so this situation does not bode all too well to providing any stability to an already unstable country.

We will have to pay close to attention to the next move either president makes now. The biggest challenge, and possibly the most significant opportunity as well falls on the man who can reduce the insane hyperinflation that the country is going through right now. The world’s the stage, and Venezuela has just started Act II. 

The Unknown Heroes of Rojava

by with No Comment FeaturedGen ZGlobal

When people think of war, they imagine the US Marine Corps or the British Royal Air Force. These are the men who receive our gratitude and respect. There are many men and women; however, that seem to go unnoticed. In 2014, The Islamic State declared their “Caliphate” inside of a Mosque in the city of Mosul, Iraq. The videos posted by the Islamic State horrified many people across the world striking fear into their hearts. There were some men and women who couldn’t sit idly and let the Islamic State continue their brutal oppression, so these everyday people, many of whom had zero military experience, left for Rojava (Western Kurdistan) to fight alongside US-backed YPG and YPJ forces. 

It is believed, around a thousand western volunteers have joined their ranks, many of whom have since lost their lives. These men and women live and die for the sake of humanity without anyone knowing their names. An IT technician named Jac Holmes from Bournemouth, UK had joined them. He quickly became infamous for his drive and skill. He carried out many operations and helped liberate the de-facto capital of the Islamic State, Raqqa. On October 23, 2017, Jac lost his life, he stepped on an IED left behind by the Islamic State. Nobody knows his name, not even most British people. He had fought bravely and with honor yet receives zero recognition for his selfless acts.

Why are his actions deemed less honorable than those in the military? He died fighting against the Islamic State and should be honored as a hero. When Trump wants to withdraw from Syria it disgusts me, it is a blatant betrayal to our loyal Kurdish allies and to all western volunteers. Jac had given his life to bring peace to Rojava; however, this peace is threatened by Turkey’s looming invasion. The best way to honor these unknown heroes is by rejecting Trump’s rash decision and demanding we stay and protect our Kurdish partners.  

Brexit: The Predictable Divorce?

by with 2 Comments FeaturedGlobal

Back in December 1992, Swiss voters refused to join the EU, and many lamented that Switzerland was going to be an island in the centre of Europe, soon isolated and helpless. Again rejected in 2001 and 2014, potential membership stayed pending until 2016, when it was officially cancelled. Last year, the world witnessed Great Britain choosing to cut loose from the EU. The Swiss were not surprised. 

If there is one thing Brexit is teaching us, it is that no economic and political breakup can happen without hurting. Not a day passes without stories of torn families, aborted career hopes and abandoned plans. The consequences are devastating and heartbreaking, even though Brexit supporters keep repeating there was no other way out. When the relationship loses its balance, it is time for a divorce.

When it had the choice, Switzerland refused to commit to the EU, despite going on several dates along the years, securing beneficial treaties while refusing the downsides of an exclusive marriage. Those who predicted the continental island was going to regret it had to admit they predicted wrongly. Too afraid of losing their identity, the Swiss preferred to wait and see whether they had really missed the boat to their honeymoon. 

The UK refusing to adopt the common currency, the Euro, was undoubtedly a strong move and a very symbolic one. While many countries struggled to counter the effects of the introduction of the Euro, the UK proudly kept their Queen’s portrait in their wallet. The power of the Swiss franc was definitely an argument against the bond.

Similarities can be seen between the USA and the UK in terms of what is at stake, and although the reactions and suggested solutions differ, the idea of sacrificing one’s happiness for the common good is hard to handle for those who think that being patriotic means being separated. The 2017 Catalonia debacle is yet another example of the rise of political and ideological divorces.

A crucial element to its uniqueness, Switzerland’s protective attitude towards its independence dictated the refusals, even when the dowry seemed attractive. Today, many people feel relieved they get to be the shoulder on which to cry instead of the estranged other. They feel sorry for the UK, but cannot help but thinking “We knew it was going to happen.” 

Similar Read: God Save the Queen: The Demise of a Regime

God Save the Queen: The Demise of a Regime

by with 3 Comments FeaturedGlobal

Our future at a standstill yet again. Brits really are living in a really tedious and overdrawn episode of Black Mirror. Instead of riding the crest of the wave of Brexit, we are very much drowning in its turbulence, our surf board bashing us in the face as it flails behind us. And yet I’m still trying to decide how I feel about it all, including Theresa May’s leadership. After all, she has had to steer a ship she didn’t want to be built in the first place.

Just a reminder as to why Britons are in despair over Brexit. If and how we leave the EU will determine the fate of the UK’s economy. Whilst countries such as Norway thrive outside the EU, the UK has built an economy based on an open market. Without absolutely any viable plan even being proposed for how we can make Brexit a success, the next 10 years is likely to be grim. Whilst our politics isn’t anywhere near as parody worthy as that occurring in the USA, the sting of our losses is continually being felt. 

Even with us being in limbo, we have already felt the impact of Brexit in the U.K. The pound is worth less than the Euro for the first time that I can remember. House prices have stagnated in London. The economy is predicted to shrink and foreign investment have either avoided us or pulled out. As an advisor to our National Health Service (NHS), I personally worry about maintaining our free accessible public healthcare system. The level of healthcare that is available free of charge in the UK is astounding. Cutting edge cures for cancer that would otherwise require life savings, pediatric spinal surgery, no qualms emergency treatment, HIV medicines, all available on the NHS. To see this potentially privatised resulting in denied equal access to thousands would perhaps be one of the greatest travesties to come out of Brexit.

Extra money for the NHS was one of many broken promises from the Brexit campaign we are still reeling from. If I had to name one positive from the campaign of lies that had been masqueraded on the side of an iconic red London bus, it would have to be what we have learned with hindsight. We have learned that it is easy to dupe even the cynical, supposedly educated British public. That pandering to xenophobia unites voters from both ends of the class spectrum. That we have strict advertising rules for multivitamins yet absolutely no safeguards to protect us from reckless, misleading claims from politicians. Even more astoundingly, that Jeremy Corbin, (leader of the main opposing party) also backed to leave the EU and no one has batted an eyelid.

As much as I shouldn’t, I can’t help but feel saddened by our lost status in the world. I’m not one to depict the UK as Royal Britannia on her chariot gracing her commonwealth subjects whilst eating scones with clotted cream and earl grey tea. However, I already miss the comfort in knowing that our politics were generally going to be somewhat centred. The time when we could roll our eyes, tut and say ‘ah, the rest of the world. What are they like?!’ I’ll say it, I miss our politics being dull. And now we take centre stage in our own slapstick amateur hour in political leadership. The chariot is now on fire and being led by blind horses hurtling towards the sea.

Currently, we are at another crossroads with a second referendum to stay/leave, early general election, no deal exit or renegotiation all on the cards. Unusually we are in a position where it is better to look back at what’s happened rather than attempting to look forward. As a young Brit living in London, it’s difficult to decide how I feel. Is this karma for the British Empire? Should we be aspiring to be like Norway/Switzerland? Have the experts got it all wrong? Or perhaps this a sinking ship and we just need to evolve into fish people to survive. And with the above being said, no Theresa. You have not done a good job.

Similar Read: The Predictable Divorce

The Delicate Art of Compromise

by with 4 Comments FeaturedGlobalPolitics

There are numerous parallels between the USA and Switzerland, a small country niched in the centre of the European continent. Both rely on federalism, both had to fight to gain or preserve their independence, and both have a huge number of weapons in circulation among the civil population. However, this is pretty much all there is to compare. Over the last couple of years, it has become obvious there is one characteristic these two nations do not share, and this is the art of compromise.

If Swiss citizens are allowed to keep their armed service rifle at home, it is strictly forbidden to own matching ammunition. Permits are delivered according to strict rules and security checks. Over the last 18 years, there have been very few mass shootings, resulting in less than 20 victims. However, army weapons tend to be used in suicides and when killing happens within the family or private circle. Swiss citizens rely very little on weapons when it comes to their own protection, but rather on private alarm systems and quick police intervention.

This peaceful approach to safety and crime is probably best mirrored in the political system and traditions of Switzerland. The seven members of the Conseil Fédéral (Federal Council) are elected by their party and each year, one of them is elected President. The major parties are usually represented according to a stable blend of political affiliation hence ensuring a balanced government. The Chambers are similarly constituted. Whereas the American campaign for presidency showcases the traditional battle between Republicans and Democrats, the Swiss live and swear by compromise. This is a very Swiss thing to disagree but go with the flow anyway. It does not mean each Swiss citizen is happy with the way things are, it is more a matter of submission to the supreme authority, the People, who regularly vote despite an obvious cultural, linguistic and social discrepancy.

Far from perfect, this system nevertheless allows people with different origins, languages, creeds and traditions to live quite peacefully together. Looking at what is happening to Switzerland’s neighbour France with the Yellow Vests Movement, or to the USA since the shutdown, it is only fair to wish they could function with compromise as well. This requires strong egos to back down and minor voices to rise, so they can meet halfway.

But the question remains, is it what powerful leaders are after? From the outside, it seems like the shutdown has nothing to do with the people, but embodies the personal and selfish victory –or defeat—one man will meet. Decisions need to be made, and what is at stake is not whether or not one man is right, but the wellbeing of thousands of people. Compared to the hundreds of migrants pouring into Europe, fleeing armed conflicts, famine and hopelessness, the USA cannot be fearing an invasion. As a nation of immigrants, who settled in the immensity of a country that already belonged to its Native peoples, the USA have a duty never to forget how they became to be.

Borders, walls, fences, and limits have probably always existed and today can still be admired as the stone ghosts of their builders’ will to protect themselves: the Great Wall of China, Hadrien’s Wall, Berlin’s Wall, or their ideological counterparts, the Iron Curtain, the Swiss Röstigraben* among others. Some know there is already a wall between the USA and Mexico, as depicted by the American writer T.C. Boyle in his 1995 novel “América”, the Tortilla Curtain rises between those who dream of a better future and those who seclude themselves in their gated communities to avoid contact with the invader. As the novel shows, the enemy is not always the stranger, and evil can grow its roots among the “rightful” ones.

No system, no regime, no government has ever been labeled perfect, but as the time comes, people can make a difference. As with children fighting over a toy, waiting for politicians to reach a compromise requires patience and understanding. But meanwhile, it requires people who work to receive the salary they deserve too. And this is why the art of compromise works in Switzerland: no one is left without a benefit. 

*Imaginary line separating French-speaking and German-speaking parts of Switzerland, alluding to a typical dish made of grated potatoes. 

Trump Pulls Troops… Kurds Turn to Assad?

by with One Comment FeaturedGlobal

As a result of Trump deciding to pull troops out of Syria, the Kurds have decided to turn to President Bashar Hafez al-Assad and the Syrian government for protection, which only complicates an already complex situation. The Kurds, who were backed by the US, are now relying on Assad for help, which is less than ideal for the US and our allies.

Similar Read: Trump’s December, A Week To Remember 

What could all this possibly mean in the near future…

1. Turkey moves on the Kurds in Syria (meaning they also attack their Kurds), which brings Kurdistan to fight with Iraq, Iran, Turkey, and Syrian Kurds, and possibly Azerbaijan and Armenia in an extreme case.

2. Syria backs up the Kurds, which means Russia also backs the Kurds.

2a. Syria, in turn, supports a free Kurdistan in order to garner further support, which would ultimately disrupt Turkey, Iraq, and Iran from holding on to their Kurdish population.

2b. Russia still wants a piece of Turkey for shooting down that fighter jet a while back. If confirmed Russia intervention on behalf of Kurds, does Turkey try to activate NATO, which by treaty pulls the US in?

3. Syria, with Russian support, gives the Kurds a new ally and, in turn, means we potentially lose a foothold in the region as we’ve burned the Kurdish population too many times.

MUSLIM “RE-EDUCATION” CAMPS?

by with One Comment Diversity & InclusionFeaturedGlobalRace Relations

Think about a group of people who were persecuted, tortured, and put into internment camps for no other reason besides their religion. The first thing that probably comes to mind is the Jews during the Holocaust – something that happened in history and will never occur again. However, there are people in 2018 who are being subjected to some of the same horrors that those people faced during World War II.

The Uyghur Muslims are a group of Muslims who live in a territory occupied by China. They have their own flag, culture, and language that separates them from the rest of China. Over the past several years, they have been persecuted by China’s government for their religion (China’s Muslim population is approximately 1.7%). Most recently, the Chinese government has detained hundreds of thousands of Uyghur Muslims and held them in internment camps, or as they call to them, “re-education” camps. They justify their actions by claiming that it is an effort to prevent terrorism fueled by religious extremism. Muslims in these camps are being brainwashed and forced to watch propaganda. They’re also being forced to participate in activities and renounce their faith and culture and pledge allegiance to the Chinese Communist Party. They’re children are often separated from their parents and put into state-run orphanages. These camps have also been referred to as “hospitals” since China views religious beliefs as a form of mental illness that must be cured. 

We have seen this happen before. When the colonizers came to North America, they forced the native people into camps in an attempt to “re-educated” them by stripping away their language, culture, and customs in an effort to control them. The Nazis forced Jews into concentration camps where they tortured an entire group for no reason other than their religion. Today, we see it happening again, and it is clear that the world’s promise of “never again” has once again been broken. 

One can only imagine the outcry if this was happening again similar to the atrocities during World War II. It seems that the same heinous behavior taking place towards Muslims in an age of readily accessible information cannot even get basic media coverage. This isn’t the first time a massacre towards Muslims has been largely ignored. The 1995 genocide in Srebrenica is still unbeknownst to most people, where more than 8,000 Muslim men and boys were murdered for their religion and the rest of the world stood by in silence (the UN declared the city a safe haven for Muslims before the massacre occurred). 

“Those who cannot learn from history are doomed to repeat it.” 

HIDDEN GENOCIDE… INTERNMENT CAMPS IN 2018?

by with No Comment Diversity & InclusionFeaturedGlobalRace Relations

History

The Uighur people are old. They have been in China for thousands of years and have a rich history filled with khans, empires, slavery, courage, and now genocide. Xinjiang is one the largest and most significant administrative regions of China. It borders eight countries. India, Pakistan, Mongolia, Russia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, and Afghanistan – and only recently, was the population of Xinjiang mostly inhabited by the Uighur.

The majority of Uighurs are Muslim, and Islam is an essential part of their daily life and identity. The language of the Uighur is part of the Turkic group of Altaic languages, making the Uighurs the oldest Turkic people of Central Asia. Because Xinjiang sits at the crossroads of the famous silk road, Its region has been booming economically and thus has brought the region into the spotlight, and also has had a push of new residents from central areas of China where the Han Chinese reside.

Throughout its long history with China, Xinjiang has had short spells of autonomy and occasional independence, but this all changed in the 18th century when the region came under the Chinese rule. In 1949, an East Turkestan state was declared, but it was short-lived, as later on that year Xinjiang officially became part of Communist China.

Because of this tug and pull of power and influence, in the 90’s, support for separatist groups increased, and its influence only grew after the collapse of the Soviet Union. This fall led to the emergence of independent Muslim states in Central Asia. However, the rise of Islamic sentiment was suppressed by Beijing, and with its suppression, demonstrators and activists were forced underground. 

What’s Happening Now

As of now, China is being accused of detaining more than a million Uighur Muslims. The U.N. has openly stated that this type of detainment resembles “a massive internment camp, shrouded in secrecy, a sort of no-rights zone.”

From the reports that are coming in through various news outlets, it is stated that the camps are currently stationed in the western region of Xinjiang. The government of China denies that such camps even exist, but inadvertently state that there are established locations named “vocational education and employment training centers” which are built to help criminals who have committed petty crimes and are need to be “rehabilitated,” so they can be reintegrated into society.

China claims that this crackdown is to maintain the peace and to prevent terrorism from finding a solid footing to grow and flourish. A government can spin the story in any form it wishes too. It is one of the great perks of being part of such a powerful establishment, the story is what they make it out to be, not what it indeed IS.

Conclusion

The documentaries and articles of the Uighur people and this ongoing struggle are plenty and heartbreaking. It needs to be cracked open like the tale of the Rohingya people was so that way the whole world can pay attention and make the “great sleeping dragon” as China is aptly known to be rudely shaken from its nap.  

Iran: What Comes Next?

by with One Comment FeaturedGen ZGlobalInternational

On May 8, President Donald Trump took perhaps the most consequential foreign policy action of his presidency thus far and announced that the United States would be withdrawing from the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), more commonly known as the Iran Nuclear Deal. Despite the fact that Iran has verifiably been compliant with the terms of the agreement, President Trump has repeatedly characterized it as a “bad deal” and the promise to withdraw the United States from it was a central pillar of his campaign. Although it fulfills the President’s campaign promise, American withdrawal from the JCPOA is comprising international security, regional stability, and the United States’ role in the international arena.  

European allies including France and Germany had spent the past several months working to convince the administration to stay a part of the deal and have made their displeasure with this development clear, indicating that they will do what they can to save the deal without the United States. This is no small task and many European diplomats have admitted that it would be exceedingly difficult. The EU does have the option of imposing retaliatory sanctions to shield European businesses or having the European Central Bank invest directly in Iran, although given the strength and pervasiveness of the American financial system it is unlikely that this would be enough to maintain the deal’s benefits for Iran. Regardless a signal has been sent to our European partners that they cannot rely on the United States to display the international leadership they once did.

If and when it becomes clear that Iran will not achieve the economic benefits that the deal promised it is highly probable that they will resume their nuclear program. Hardliners within Iran will take this opportunity to make the case that diplomacy is futile and future agreements will become increasingly difficult. At the same time, the country’s more moderate President, Hassan Rouhani, will likely see his influence weakened. As the Iranian economy, which has already been suffering from unrelated US sanctions, continues to get worse, it is average Iranian citizens who will bear the brunt of the sanctions. This could lead to a degree of social unrest, although any protests are likely to get cracked down upon early and hard.

If Iran does reinstate its nuclear program it will be much harder to once again put together the international sanctions regime that brought Iran to the negotiating table to begin with. Sanctions against the Iranian regime were effective when the international community worked as a united front. Unilateral US sanctions are likely to have a substantially smaller impact on the regime’s actions. Many of the most effective US sanctions, known as “secondary sanctions” or sanctions, levied not on the Iranian regime directly but on parties doing business with Iran. The reimposition of these sanctions is likely to have the greatest impact as they will act as a significant deterrent to European businesses who were quick to begin doing business in the country after the sanctions were lifted. It will also impact American firms, such as Boeing which had a large deal in place to supply airplane parts to Iran’s civil airline.  

What will most likely happen?

The US sanctions will be enough to prevent Iran from getting the benefits of the nuclear deal, thereby causing the deal to fall apart, but not enough to curb its activities in the region.

Refusing to stick to the accords doesn’t just increase the likelihood that Iran will end up with a nuclear weapon in the near term, it also sets a bad precedent and undermines faith in the United States with regards to future international negotiations. This is especially pertinent considering the upcoming summit with North Korea. The deal that is reportedly being offered to Kim Jong-Un, economic relief in exchange for the cessation of the country’s nuclear program, is similar to the one that the Trump administration is now reneging on with Iran. If the US has proven itself unable to stick to a deal once agreed upon with Iran, why would the North Koreans expect to be treated any differently?

Regardless of what one thinks of the administration’s withdrawal from the deal, it happened. The question now is what’s next?

At the end of his speech announcing the American withdrawal, President Trump expressed a willingness to renegotiate the deal. There is however little indication of what the administration would hope to gain by doing so. In fact, the administration seems to have no clear strategy on the issue. The vague normative statements, half-truths, and political chest-thumping that have characterized the President’s comments on the issue are not enough. If regional and international security is to be maintained, it is essential that the administration has a clear strategy for how to handle Iran in both the near and long-term.