| Papers [1-14] of 100 :: [Page 1 of 8] | | Go to page : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 —> | Search results on "IRAN FOREIGN POLICY": |
|
|
Iran's Foreign Policy, 2007.
An analysis of Iran's foreign policy with regard to its regional support and relations with the United States.
1,527 words (approx. 6.1 pages), 10 sources, APA, £ 35.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper presents an overview of Iran's foreign policy since the fall of the Shah and the Iranian Revolution in 1979. It particularly focuses on its regional influence and its support for terrorist organizations such as Hezbollah, Islamic Jihad and Hamas. The paper then discusses Iran's relations with the United States, particularly following September 11.
Table of Contents:
After the Revolution
Who Makes Iran's Foreign Policy?
The Changing Directions of Iran's Foreign Policy
The US-Iran Relations in the Post 9/11 Scenario
Iran's Support for Terrorist Organizations
Conclusion
From the Paper
"The moderate former President Khatami tried to improve Iran's relations with the US as Iran even encouraged its allies in Afghanistan to co-operate with the Americans the Taliban regime after the 9/11 terrorist attacks. The relations again turned sour as President Bush declared Iran as part of the "axis of evil." For a short while after the US invasion of Iraq in March 2003, the Iranian regime seemed to be intimidated at the prospect of a similar pre-emptive operation by the US against Iran (Schwartz). The fear was reflected in its sudden start of negotiations with the EU on ending Iran's nuclear program. The window of opportunity was, however, lost when the US insisted on a regime change and the determined insurgency in Iraq took root. The marked difference in behavior of the US against states that had nuclear capability (e.g., North Korea) and those which did not, also convinced the Iranians about the advantage of acquiring a nuclear deterrence; hence the current stand-off on the Iranian nuclear program between Iran and US."
| |
|
U.S. Foreign Policy on Iran, 2002.
An overview of the background of U.S.-Iranian relations and the rationale of U.S. interests in Iran.
4,025 words (approx. 16.1 pages), 13 sources, £ 103.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper will take a critical look at U.S. Foreign Policy towards Iran to make sense of the situation. First, brief background of US-Iranian relations will be provided, followed by an outlining of the rationale of US interest in Iran. The primary thrust of the paper will look at US policy towards Iran in the post Gulf War era. Specifically, the fundamental question that will be addressed is, how has the Clinton administration viewed Iran, and has the US's 'containment' stance towards Iran been an example of sound foreign policy?
| |
|
Soviet Foreign Policy in Iran 1945-1979, 2005.
A paper on the political and economic developments between Iran and the Soviet Union.
5,075 words (approx. 20.3 pages), 13 sources, MLA, £ 90.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This study examines earlier Soviet Union foreign policy towards Iran. The paper looks at how Soviet foreign policy grew and, at times, declined through economic cooperation with Iran from 1945-1979. Particular emphasis is shifted away from Cold War stances and upon nation to nation growth. An outline of the study is appended to the paper.
From the Paper
"James Harlon Williams characterizes Soviet foreign policy in the Persian Gulf region as a "product of historical experience." Historically, it followed a pattern or strategy of "expansion, consolidation, and preservation." As Imperial Russia expanded its borders during the course of the Great Game in Asia, it emerged as the most powerful Continental power in Central Asia. Quickly thereafter, Russia moved to consolidate and preserve that power through political shoving matches with Great Britain. While the Russians significantly pushed their borders southwards towards Iran, the British countered Russian influence in order to protect British India. The idea of Iran as a "buffer" state acted as the way the British used Iran to prevent Russian penetration towards the Persian Gulf. Since the British resisted a stronger Russian presence in the Gulf, Russia employed a series of proxy conflicts while averting war with Britain. Playing a game of power politics dominated Russian and British diplomacy. From the mid-19th to the early 20th centuries both sides asserted their political dominance in Iran. Their goal was to dominate the enemy as much as possible yet averting war at all costs. Engaging in a head to head war would not be beneficial to either Russia or Great Britain from an economic and military perspective. In doing so, the tsar abandoned hopes of obtaining a warm water port in the Gulf."
| |
|
Iranian Foreign Policy, 2005.
Questions whether the foreign policy of the Islamic Republic of Iran has been coherent.
1,753 words (approx. 7.0 pages), 16 sources, MLA, £ 39.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
An international relations essay on Iranian foreign policy since the 1979 revolution. The paper argues that foreign policy became incoherent after Khomeini's death in 1989 but notes that Ahmadinejad's leadership has been leading the Islamic Republic back toward its revolutionary roots.
From the Paper
"In February 1979, a two-day uprising led to the collapse of the Pahlevi monarchy in Iran. The state became the Islamic Republic of Iran, with Ruhollah Khomeini as the Supreme Leader until his death in 1989. After the revolution, the state was "defiant, fiercely independent, proactively religious, and nonaligned." This new stance was reflected in the state's foreign policy, which was, overall, coherent until 1988-9. The end of the Cold War, the Iran-Iraq ceasefire, and the death of the Ayatollah Khomeini led to reorientations of policy. In the late eighties and after, under the presidents Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani, Mohammad Khatami Iranian foreign policy became more self-contradictory. It unsuccessfully combined pragmatic diplomacy with revolutionary behaviour-seeking ties, for example, with states whose leadership it was trying to undermine. The result is that since 1989, the Islamic Republic of Iran has had an incoherent foreign policy, but the current president has been leading it back toward revolutionary behaviour and increased coherence."
| |
|
Reagan's Foreign Policy, and the Soviet Union, 2004.
Analyses the Reagan foreign policy, and how it consistently confronted the Soviet Union in ways that forced it to spend huge amounts of money on defense. Makes the argument that this is the main reason that the Soviet Union collapsed.
2,800 words (approx. 11.2 pages), 11 sources, MLA, £ 58.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper highlights the portions of Ronald Reagan's foreign policy that confronted the Soviet Union in ways that forced the United States to spend large amounts of money. The foreign policy issues that are examined include Afghanistan, The Iran-Contra Affair, Reagan's support of Eastern-European Dissidents and Reagan's Strategic Defense Initiative, (also known as "Star Wars"). Afghanistan is heavily analyzed, with a breakdown of significant historical points, such as the introduction of the US-made Stinger missile, which stripped the USSR of air superiority. The Iran-Contra affair is included as a way to demonstrate Reagan's willingness to confront communism everywhere. This was a marked policy shift from Jimmy Carter and caught the USSR off guard. The Strategic Defense Initiative is analyzed and is linked to an increased amount of money being spent by the USSR on research and development. The support of dissidents by Reagan is looked at as well, with the conclusion that with relatively little amounts of effort, Reagan's foreign policy fomented large amounts of political opposition to the Soviet Union in Eastern European satellite countries. This caused the Soviet Union to spend money combating this problem as well, with their spy apparatus. Definitive numbers are given that explain just how much the Soviet Union spending increased while Reagan was in office.
From the Paper
"In the 1980's, a swirling of events converged to form a perfect storm that met the conditions for bringing down what Ronald Reagan termed the "evil empire." The first incident was that Old School communists in the Politburo sought to make an impression in Central Asia, but found stalwart resistance in The Gipper. Second, Reagan's abrupt shift from Carter's lax foreign policy took the Soviets by surprise, with the new administration's desire to challenge communism on every front possible; out of this desire came the ill-fated support of the contras, along with the hugely successful backing of Eastern European dissidents, namely the Solidarity movement in Eastern Europe. The third event in Reagan's foreign policy shift that took the world by surprise was the administration's renunciation of the doctrine of Mutually Assured Destruction; Reagan took the steps of beginning a Ballistic Missile Defense program, which he coined the Strategic Defense Initiative. The Soviets, with few options of recourse, were forced to make concessions that led to the implosion of the "evil empire" shortly afterward. Thus, by applying a policy of confrontation of spreading Communism, bleeding the Soviets in Afghanistan by supporting the mujahideen, and abruptly announcing a paradigm shift in American foreign policy with the Strategic Defense Initiative, Ronald Reagan certainly hastened, if not caused the downfall of the USSR."
| |
|
U.S.-Iraq Foreign Policy, 2003.
An examination of the international relationship between the U.S. and Iraq over the past two decades.
2,802 words (approx. 11.2 pages), 4 sources, MLA, £ 58.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper discusses how the United States foreign policy toward the Middle East has been greatly tested, challenged and even questioned. From the Iran-contra scandal that plagued the Reagan administration even down to the current foreign policy concerning anti-terrorism, it looks at how the nation has been forced to constantly evaluate how much its foreign policy measures up to its ideals of freedom and liberty. It analyzes the relationship with Iraq and how the United States is justified in its current ideologies as it concerns Iraq. It evaluates how its application of that policy not only contradicts the United Nations'(UN) policy, but it also defeats itself, for its application deviates far from its theoretical principles.
Outline
Iraqi History and Foreign Policy
Historical View of U.S. Foreign Policy
Current U.S. Foreign Policy and Its Problems
From the Paper
"The United States also claims that the Iraqi government is still manufacturing and mass-producing weapons of mass destruction; and therefore, it is the United States? duty to stop Iraq from producing such weapons. The problem with this argument is that the conflict regarding Iraq?s alleged production of mass destruction has always been a conflict between the Iraqi government and the United Nations, not between Iraq and the United States. Additionally, before the United Nations Special Commission (UNSCOM) was withdrawn from Iraq, it documented the destruction of 38,000 chemical weapons, 480,000 liters of live chemical weapons agents, forty-eight missiles, six missile launchers, thirty missile warheads, and hundreds of materials that were equipped with the ability to produce chemical weapons (Zunes 2). While early UNSCOM inspections revealed evidence of Iraq producing large amounts of biological agents (to include anthrax), it quickly set up highly technological devices to detect chemical and biological weapons, even after they were dismantled after the December 1998 bombing raids from the Clinton administration. And even if the Iraqi government were to be bold enough to continue to engage in mass production of biological and/or chemical weapons, these weapons would almost certainly be detected by the satellite system put in place by UNSCOM and later destroyed in tactical air strikes."
| |
|
U.S. and Mid-East Foreign Policy, 2003.
A discussion of why American foreign policy towards the Middle East is questionable.
3,200 words (approx. 12.8 pages), 10 sources, MLA, £ 65.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
Outlines the events leading up to the September 11th attacks, covering the U.S.'s new dependency on oil after WWI, the creation of the Israeli state, U.S. involvement in Iran, U.S. involvement in Iraq during the 80s, and the devastating sanctions on Iraq.
From the Paper
"On September 11th 2001, terrorists attacked the United States. In the immediate aftermath so many Americans asked the same question??Why??, Why would anyone do something as horrific as that? I found myself asking the same question, and I immediately began looking for the answer through research. What I?ve found is that the only way to try to comprehend the hatred that many Americans have been forced to witness after years of being able to look the other way, is to look at how the roots of resentment in the Middle East sprouted into something uncontrollable. This development of hatred can be outlined through the history of the United States? foreign policy in the region, a history of the U.S. doing almost anything to protect its interests while ignoring the plight of the native citizens, the well being of other nations, and even going as far as ignoring the United States? own ideals."
| |
|
U.S. Policy Toward Iran and Iran, 1999.
Examines the evolution from the 1960s-90s. Discusses leadership, Cold War and the Balance of Power ideologies, the Iran-Iraq War, terrorism, the Persian Gulf War, dual containment and economic issues.
4,500 words (approx. 18.0 pages), 26 sources, £ 95.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This research discusses the evolution of American foreign policy toward Iraq and Iran in recent decades. In the 1970s, the United States relied chiefly on Iran, which it supported with economic and military aid to maintain its interests in the region.
From the Paper
"AMERICAN FOREIGN POLICY TOWARD IRAQ AND IRAN
Introduction
This research discusses the evolution of American foreign policy toward Iraq and Iran in recent decades. In the 1970s, the United States relied chiefly on Iran, which it supported with economic and military aid to maintain its interests in the region. After the Khomeini Revolution of 1979 and during the Iran-Iraq War of 1980-1988, it played Iraq and Iran against each other but, as time went by, shifted most of its support to Iraq. During the Persian Gulf War, the United States marshalled a powerful coalition war effort against the Iraqis but stopped short of marching on Baghdad and toppling Saddam Hussein for fear of shifting the power balance in the central Middle East to Iran. Since 1993, the Clinton administration has pursued a policy of ..."
| |
|
Reagan's Policy in Iran-Iraq War, 1996.
Analyzes U.S. tilt toward Iraq in 1980-1988. Background, overall Middle East policy, secret talks, aid, arms for hostages deal with Iran, aftermath.
1,125 words (approx. 4.5 pages), 5 sources, £ 27.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
From the Paper
"This research paper summarizes and evaluates the policies pursued by the Reagan Administration during the war between Iran and Iraq (1980-1988). The basic policy of the United States during that period was to maintain a balance of power in the Middle East which after 1982 resulted in a decided tilt of the United States to support of Iraq. That policy served American interests well during the war, except for one glaring inconsistency, the administration's abortive attempts to arrange arms for hostages deals with Iran which backfired and led to the Irangate controversy. The continuation of an accommodating policy toward Iraq after the end of the war is more controversial and led to the Gulf War, but President George Bush not President Ronald Reagan, must bear responsibility for not adapting policy..."
| |
|
U.S. Policy Toward Iran & Iraq, 1989-1997, 1999.
A analysis and comparison of the Bush and Clinton policies including background (Iran-Iraq War, conflict with Israel), objectives, effectiveness, economic, political, military & diplomatic aspects, Persian Gulf War, oil, human rights and terrorism.
6,075 words (approx. 24.3 pages), 25 sources, £ 95.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
From the Paper
"United States Foreign Policy Toward Iran & Iraq, 1989-1997
Introduction
United States foreign policy toward Iran and Iraq during the 1989-1997 period is described, analyzed, and assessed in this research. The period of investigation, 1989-1997, corresponds to the tenures of the Bush Administration and the Clinton Administration (through the time this research was performed in April 1997). Thus, the primary objective of this research was to compare, contrast, and evaluate the foreign policies of the Bush and Clinton administrations toward Iran and Iraq.
The thesis of this research is that the foreign policies of the Bush Administration toward Iran and Iraq were more effective in protecting the interests of the United States than the..."
| |
|
U.S. Policy in the Middle East, 2006.
This paper compares two books which discuss current U.S. policy in the Middle East.
1,200 words (approx. 4.8 pages), 2 sources, APA, £ 29.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper explains that Ali Ansari in "Confronting Iran: The Failure of American Foreign Policy and the Next Great Conflict in the Middle East" paints the current crisis with Iran as a lesson in mutually antagonistic behavior that is demonstrated by the inability of United States presidents, from Carter to Bush, to formulate an effective policy for dealing with this country. The author points out that Dennis Ross in "The Missing Peace: The Inside Story of the Fight for Peace in the Middle East" commends the U.S re-involvement in the Israel-Palestinian problem, introduced in President Bush's historic 2002 speech, which outlined a strategy for peace calling for a two state solution. The paper relates that both Ansari and Ross are strong believers in the power of communication because, as long as all sides to these political clashes are still talking, there is hope for peaceful solutions and cooperation rather than chaos.
From the Paper
"Ansari does not take a particularly optimistic tone about the chances of these changes happening. He is very adamant that they must happen or the resulting conflict will "make Iraq look like the cakewalk it was prophesied to be." . Ansari presents his argument in a very matter-of-fact manner, taking the struggle between Iran and the United States step by step from their first official contact in 1856 all the way into the present day. A very realistic, pragmatic tone is taken that, while not entirely hopeful, does suggest that differences can be bridged."
| |
|
U.S. Policy in the Persian Gulf, 1991.
This paper discusses the policy of the United States in the Persian Gulf: Historical and strategic background, national interests, economics, oil, Iran-Iraq War, Kuwait, re-flagging of ships and U.N.and Reagan Policy.
2,250 words (approx. 9.0 pages), 8 sources, £ 56.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
From the Paper
"This paper will be concerned with the policy of the United States in the Persian Gulf. U.S. policy-makers see the Persian Gulf as being a strategically important area. In particular, the area is seen as being important because of the oil resources which are located there. By maintaining a presence in the Persian Gulf, the United States is not only protecting its own oil interests, but is protecting those of its Western allies as well. Prior to the United States adopting this role, Great Britain was the major Western force to be found in the Persian Gulf. Oil was first discovered in the region at the turn of the twentieth century. At about the same time, the British government began obtaining oil concessions there. These concessions gave Britain powerful control over the local politics of the Persian Gulf. However, after the Second World War, ... "
| |
|
The Legality of Foreign Judgements, 2004.
An analysis of sections 13 and 14 of the 1900 Indian Civil Procedure Code.
3,697 words (approx. 14.8 pages), 4 sources, APA, £ 72.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
The paper studies the binding nature of the foreign judgments i.e. judgments given by the courts in foreign countries and the scope and object of section 13 of the Indian Civil Procedure Code. It also describes project describes the conditions under which the judgments given by any foreign court creates the rule of estoppel or res judicata.
Outline
Nature and Scope of Sec. 13, C.P.C.
Jurisdiction to Foreign Courts
Binding Nature of Foreign Judgments: Principles
Foreign Judgment Not By a Competent Court
Foreign Judgment Not on Merits
Foreign Judgment Against International or Indian Law
Foreign Judgments Opposed to Natural Justice
Foreign Judgment Obtained By Fraud
Foreign Judgment Founded on Breach of Indian Law
Presumption as to Foreign Judgments: Section 14
Submission to Jurisdiction of Foreign Court
Conclusiveness of Foreign Judgment
Enforcement of Foreign Judgments
Foreign Awards
Conclusion
From the Paper
"Explaining the nature of fraud, de Grey, C.J. stated that though a judgment would be res judicata and not impeachable from within, it might be impeachable from without. In other words, though it is not permissible to show that the court was "mistaken", it might be shown that it was "misled". There is an essential distinction between mistake and trickery. The clear implication of the distinction is that an action to set aside a judgment cannot be brought on the ground that it has been wrongly decided, namely, that on the merits, the decision was one which should not have been rendered, but it can be set aside if the court was imposed upon or tricked into giving the judgment."
| |
|
China Market-Foreign Exchange Rate, 2006.
A look at how China uses its foreign exchange rate to make it difficult for foreign goods and imports to penetrate the Chinese market while simultaneously encouraging foreign investment.
1,575 words (approx. 6.3 pages), 3 sources, £ 43.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This research examines the supposition that China utilizes its foreign exchange rate to erect an effective barrier to foreign imports of goods and services while it encourages foreign direct investment. The strategy China employs to expand its export market and minimize its import market is simple but effective and not as blatantly antagonistic as an outright tariff on imports or imposition of quotas on imported goods.
|
|
|
