HUMANITIES COMPETENCY
人文能力
In addition to studying Chinese literature and philosophy, much of my undergraduate career has been invested in studying international affairs.
除了研究中国文学和哲学外，我的大部分大学生涯都投入到了国际事务的研究中。
ZHU XI'S PHILOSOPHICAL IMPACT
This is your Project description. Whether your work is based on text, images, videos or a different medium, providing a brief summary will help visitors understand the context and background. Then use the media section to showcase your project!
THE LIFE OF MILAREPA
Milarepa's story is offers quintessential insight into Tibetan Buddhism. Regarded as one of the most widely influential and best-known Tibetan Buddhist stories, a critical understanding of Milarepa's life is necessary to understand the development of Tibetan Buddhism.
DEVELOPMENTS IN IRANIAN NUCLEAR PROLIFERATIONS
This article discusses the history of nuclear developments in Iran as it pertains to the current legislature, particularly the 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action.
TRUMP'S ROLE IN THE ISRAEL-PALESTINE TWO STATE SOLUTION
This article addresses Donald Trump's precedent breaking approach to the Israel-Palestine conflict and the international community's reaction.
ZHU XI'S PHILOSOPHICAL IMPACT
Zhu Xi’s philosophies have been a defining component of Chinese philosophy since his life in the Song Dynasty for almost one thousand years, and his influence on Chinese thought is said to be second only to Confucius himself. His precocious childhood earned him the opportunity to learn from multiple well-known Daoism, Buddhist, and Confucius scholars and led him to pass the jinshi test at the early age of 19. He proceeded to challenge some of the most prominent philosophers of the day including Li Tong and Hu Hong on their principles of meditation. Xi’s new theories on meditation were particularly revolutionary because in proposing a new method of meditation, he implied that reaching sagehood rested upon the realization of different ideals than previously thought. Because reaching sagehood is the objective of philosophical thought, Xi turned the philosophical world upside down with his radical theories.
Zhu Xi pulled from the work of multiple great scholars before him in order to formulate some of the most revolutionary ideas of the past thousand years. His views on morality, how to obtain it, and how to execute moral behavior within the government also changed the principles behind the governing system in China. Zhu Xi’s principles went on to be the crux of government entrance exams until the 20th century. So not only were his principles the paradigm of study for all government officials, but those in power were all prepared to enforce the principles.
Zhu’s oral teachings can be found in the Classified Dialogues of Master Zhu today. Also in addition to writing numerous books himself, he published several annotated classics. Throughout his entire life he worked tirelessly with the goal of restoring Confucianst principles of morality to the Chinese government. Although he was a proud Chinese citizen, devout to tradition he still saw room for improvement within the Chinese system of governing.
Zhu Xi’s Life, Philosophies, and Impact on China
Zhu Xi was born in Youqi in Fujian around October in the year 1130. Despite an interest in government affairs and academia from a young age, when Xi passed the government entrance exam at just the age of nineteen he decided to hold temple guardianships rather than office. The main factors influencing this unorthodox decision included Xi’s opposition to a series of government policies as well as his hope to continue conducting philosophical research unhindered by the by the corrupt influence of politics. Because of this decicions, Xi had more time to study Chinese history and literature as well as contribute his own philosophies and art to academia. Aside from his philosophical contributions, Xi is well known for contributing refined poetry.
From a young age the works of Menicus, a philosopher who would later serve as a major influence to his theories, inspired Xi. Menicus’s theory that any individual could become a sage motivated Xi to simultaneously examine the theories of other prominent philosophers and develop his own propositions. Zhu Xi’s father passed away while Zhu Xi was still a young boy however before passing, he organized several well-versed teachers to educate his son. For years throughout his youth Xi dedicated himself to learning the principles of Daoism, Buddhism, and Confucianism. His eclectic group of teachers including scholars and monks gave him a variety of perspectives to draw upon for his own theories. However, the theories of qi and li for began developing when he started studying under Li Tong, a well known Neo-confucian master Xi’s father had recommended Xi study under, in 1160. Li Tong was a major influence of Xi’s focus on philosophizing political morality. Many of Xi’s books reflect his passion for restoring this political morality, a Confucian idea.
Xi’s emphasis on restoring the weakened Confucian ideals of his time led him to actively oppose many Taoist and Buddhist beliefs. During Xi’s time, many citizens perceived Confucianism as a political practice rather than spiritual and therefore turned to Buddhism and Taoism to fulfill religious voids. However, Xi preached that Confucianism was a spiritual practice and could lead one to wisdom and morality if they were able to harness control of their “qi”.
The concept of “qi” and “li” is one for which Xi is most well known. Xi perceived the universe as being made of both “qi”, physical material, and “li”, nonphysical principles”. Humans are composed of both li and qi. While various translations of qi and li exist, the most important distinction is that li is perfect and inherently good. As a result, humans are inherently good it is just the physical matter, or the qi, that needs to be perfected in order to achieve wisdom and clarity of thought. He also mentions a concept of taiji, a metaphysical concept which is the substance of human soul and is the combination of qi and li as it is played out in a human. Qi and li not only balance each other but oppose each other and are in constant dependence. It is said when one is expanding its energy it is in the “yang” mode of energy and when it is decreasing in energy it is in the “yin” mode of energy. As a result, neither the yin or yang is dominant over the other. Additionally Xi used the concept of qi and li to attempt to explain the variation in the traditional 5 Chinese elements of matter. He argued that the way their li was configured determined the nature of their existence. As a result, all living things had differently organized li’s than nonliving things and animals and plants held high significance to humans beyond their direct use to keep humans alive. Instead all of nature was seen as a pattern created by the li, giving it a high significance than something that is purely physical.
Critics of these theories about the li and qi state that the theories themselves do not give any true insight into the makeup or purpose of physical being and nonphysical thoughts but rather just give them names. As a result, some viewed these theories as a nuisance because of their inability to be proved. Additionally Zhu often theorized in very general and ambiguous language, leaving some of his thoughts up for interpretation. For example, he said the, “earth was floating on water; both below the earth and surrounding its four sides with water, but he also said that qi surrounded the earth.” In this example, Zhu does not give any scientific evidence as to why the earth is floating on water or how he developed that theory. Additionally, stating that qi surrounds the earth does not explain its applicability to human life or to the li. Zhu conceptualized qi as anything that came from cosmic vapor, making it therefore a tangible thing and conceptualized li as the patterns of the universe.
Additionally, some critics of Zhu’s work accused him of giving humans unwarranted significant within the universe. However, Zhu defended his ideals by attributing human life not to cosmic happenstance but instead to a manifestation of a pattern that can be seen in the li. As a result, humans are part of the natural cycle of the universe as are all other matters, biotic or abiotic.
Some critics of Xi’s theories of qi and li state that his system appears like the Buddhist concept of yin and yang and as a result, is not a new concept. However, Xi claimed that the implications of his theories were different from those of Buddhist philosophy. For example many Buddhist philosophies on meditation emphasize completely clearly the mind. However, Xi thought this theory was somewhat unreasonable. Other theories of the day proposed the opposite of Buddhist philosophies on meditation, that instead of doing as little as possible and clearing one’s mind, one should go about their normal actions as consciously as possible, analyzing every of their decisions. Xi also disagreed with this line of thought arguing that this mode of introspection made one too self centered in their daily life. Xi’s solution aligned with previous philosophies from Zhou that while activity and stillness were mutually exclusive in terms of physical objects, they are not necessarily mutually exclusive for nonphysical for one’s mind. Xi especially was interested in this perspective of the mind because it seemed to give the mind supernatural tendencies that separated it definitively from mindless material. However, Xi did not downplay the importance of other matter and its origins. He believed that all matter was a manifestation of the organization of the universe and which category the particles belonged to, earth, wood, fire, water, or metal, depended on the li. Without these elements in addition to humans and humans’ qi, the universe would be off balance.
As far as Xi’s principles on moral action, his philosophy rests upon the idea that, “It is like a person who cannot walk without legs although he has eyes, and who cannot see without eyes although he has legs. With respect to order knowledge comes first, and with respect to importance, action is more important”. Xi essentially is attempting to portray in this quote that physical action is what gives thoughts importance because without action progress cannot be made. However, one cannot act properly without a full understand of why they are acting. So the two concepts of action and thought are both crucial for moral outcomes. This understanding was particularly important for Xi because much of his philosophical research concerned determining the “conditions of moral agency” and “setting forth a viable program of moral self-cultivation on that basis” (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy).
Zhu did hold some opposition in his time, namely Lu Zuqian, on the principles of education. Zhu believed in more of a regimented approach to study: that specific objectives should be met and there should be time for practice and reflection. These ideals aligned with previous Confucius thought that learning should be structured with a specific time and place for different actions. However, Lu Zuqian opposed this idea. He perceived education as a more open ended opportunity to reflect upon oneself and clear ones mind. Zuqian theorized that with a clear mind, one would be able to see solutions to any problem they are faced with clearly and without a clear mind, regardless of educational background, one would likely have great difficulty coming to a viable conclusion.
Zhu also faced opposition from a “utilitarian Confucian master Chen Liang who argued that Zhu’s proposition on how to obtain wisdom was too self centered. He argued that obtaining knowledge could be done so in a broader more systematic way through enforced rules and guidelines. However, Zhu’s arguments were more popular in his day because of their focus on the individual. It seems to have appealed to the audience that no matter one’s current societal status, one can obtain wisdom through their own works. This is particularly appealing because the individual will not be left to depend upon anyone else to reach their own state of wisdom.
Many wonder why Zhu’s teachings became so famous despite there being numerous other philosophers at the time writing a variation of theories on the same topics. Well when broken apart, Zhu’s arguments are seen to be ambiguous enough to apply to almost everyone, while specific enough to supply real guidelines and principles to pursue morality. Some of the other theories of the day were too specific to appeal to those following a Buddhist or a Taoist faith. While Zhu did denounce Buddhism and Taoism, the guiding principles of his Confucian perspective were not far fetched from the principles of those religions. As a result, it was easier for Buddhists and Taoists to relate to Zhu’s perspective on Confucianism. Zhu was popular and esteemed in his lifetime but his influence on Chinese culture was solidified when the Chinese government began using his edition of the Four Books as the basis for the entrance examination for scholars to earn a position in the government.
However even despite his prominence in the government four years to come, he still received criticisms after his death. A Ming scholar named Wang Yangming instigated one prominent controversy over his work. It is said that Yangming initially admired Zhu’s work and tried Zhu’s suggested methods of observing: “investigate things to discern their defining patterns” (Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy). However, after attempting to observe bamboo for a few days and feeling as though he gained no new knowledge on the topic, Yangming argued that Zhu’s approach to wisdom was flawed because one cannot look outward for something that comes from within. Yangming went on to argue that knowledge gained is not necessarily factual, but instead “rooted in moral sensitivity” (Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy).
Zhu’s work can be interpreted in both metaphysical and naturalistic methods. When examined metaphysically, one can understand that Zhu intended for the meaning of the li to be a pattern, not necessarily a principle. As a result the li mitigates balance and modulation. When discussing more naturalistically one can observe the physical manifestations of li such as the intricate patterns within a leaf or the orbit of a planet. This ability to interpret Zhu’s work from a series of different perspectives is just another way that Zhu’s works appeal to people across cultures.
THE LIFE OF MILAREPA
The story of Milarepa’s life has undeniably made a major impact on the formation of Tibetan Buddhism today. Various versions of Milarepa’s stories have been handed down for hundreds of years, but the core principles uniting all of his stories have held major influence in the evolution of Tibetan culture and religious beliefs. In The Life of Milarepa, Heruka provides insight into what has become the classic version of this famous Tibetan cultural story. The themes throughout the life of Milarepa such as sin and redemption, devotion to one’s teacher, dedication and determination, and the dream and possibility of liberation through achieving enlightenment, all highlight some of Buddhism’s most classic conflicts, which develop into classic Tibetan conflicts. In this way, The Life of Milarepa demonstrates the way these themes transitioned from Buddhist themes into themes within the lives of all Tibetan peoples, illustrating the pivotal role of Buddhism in the lives of Tibetan people today and the significance this book holds in establishing the story of how Buddhism became widely practiced in Tibet.
Milarepa’s story begins with the discussion of his transition from a privileged son of wealthy parents, to the struggle over the death of his sick father and his proceeding troubled youth. Much of his and his nuclear family’s strife stems from betrayal from Milarepa’s greedy aunt and uncle who lie in order to steal Milarepa’s dead father’s possessions. Milarepa’s father had wished upon his death bed that all of his possessions should be divided among his children when they come of age but Milarepa’s aunt and uncle claim the possessions for their own and force Milarepa, his mother, and sister into a life of extreme poverty. When Milarepa turned fifteen, his mother scraped together all of the family’s savings to host a feast for their extended family in order to ask the family once more to reconsider giving the Milarepa his rightful inheritance.
Unfortunately for Milarepa, his aunt and uncle refused to repay any riches to Milarepa. Now with all of her savings gone and a burning rage within her, Milarepa’s mother decided to send Milarepa to study black magic and seek revenge on his greedy aunt and uncle. Milarepa served as an apprentice for a sorcerer and eventually began to use his newly developed skills as his mother had hoped. Through the use of black magic he caused a building to collapse upon his family while they were attending a wedding, killing everyone inside except the aunt and uncle who had stolen his inheritance. He determined that the punishment of watching all of their loved ones die, and continuing on without them, was a more severe punishment than death.
However even with this horrific act, Milarepa’s mother did not feel that justice had been fully served to the greedy aunt and uncle. She instructed Milarepa to destroy all of their farmland, which Milarepa did through sending a major hailstorm through the land. However after this storm, Milarepa realized that he had destroyed many innocent people’s crops in the quest to obtain revenge for his family. Deeply ashamed, Milarepa returned to his sorcerer teacher, seeking guidance. This sorcerer encouraged Milarepa to pursue another form of learning under a different guru.
Eventually, Milarepa felt guided to study under Marpa, a master of Mahamudra practices. The night before Milarepa approached Marpa, Marpa had a vision in which one of Marpa’s renowned former teachers bestowed upon his a tarnished diamond that after polishing proved to be an gem of unparalleled quality. Marpa took this vision to mean that he was on the brink of encountering a student with a troubled past and incredible potential. When Milarepa began studying under Marpa, he was instantly recognized as the student from the vision and Marpa put him to work with hard labor. Marpa told Milareps to build a tower with his bare hands. After the completion of this tower, Mrapa told Milarepa to take apart the tower and put all the elements that he used to construct the tower back to where he fund them. Milarepa complied only to have the request to build a tower made again. After Milarepa completed the building on the second tower, he was again asked to put the elements back to where they were originally found. This same request to build and take apart the tower happened a third time. After this third time, Milarepa grew weary and frustrated. However, Marpa made a claim that he would ask Milarepa to build a tower only one more time and Milarepa would not be asked to take it down. This tower, however, was to be nine stories high and Milarepa was exhausted and skeptical that he would be asked, once again, to deconstruct his work upon completion.
Despite his doubts, he began building the tower. His back broke out in giant sores but he continued to build. Eventually, Marpa’s wife, Lady Dagmema, expressed concern for Milarepa’s health. Marpa disregarded these concerns and told Milarepa that if he wanted teachings immediately, he would need to seek guidance elsewhere. Lady Dagmema then drafted a letter to antother guru for Milarepa and explained the nature of his problems with Marpa. Milarepa went with this letter to meet the other guru. However, After meditating with this guru without progress, Milarepa decided to return to Marpa. Upon his return, Marpa took him back as a student, and told him that actually, Milarepa had already learned most of his lessons, but upon completion of the tower, Marpa would share the final mysteries of his wisdom. Milarepa began working on the tower once again, all the while Lady Dagmema supporting and encouraging him. As Milarepa finished, Marpa held his promise and shared all of his wisdom with Milarepa. After Milarepa had received these teachings, he became a well known enlightened guru.
Milarepa lived in the deep mountains during his training and subsisted only off of nettle soup, causing his skin to turn green. As a result, he is often depicted in scripture and paintings with a slight green tint. This green tint is looked upon as a symbol of his humility. Additionally, he wore only a white cotton robe during this time, which is actually how he received the name Milarepa meaning “cotton-clad”. Milarepa eventually achieved enlightenment and although he did not pursue students, many came to receive his teachings. He was a crucial teacher because of his deep knowledge of Marpa’s teachings. Even one of the future founders of the Kagyu school of Tibetan Buddhism, Gampopa Sonam Rinchen, studied under Milarepa. Milarepa’s death is estimated to have been the year 1135.
The style in which The Life of Milarepa is written is also extremely significant within cultural context. For example, the story begins with the line “Thus did I hear”. This line is said to be how one of Buddha’s most important disciples, Ananda, began reciting the teaching of the Buddha. The Buddha selected Ananda to hear each of his teaching because of Ananda’s amazing memory and commitment to Buddhism. After the Buddha’s death, Ananda was called to recite all of the Buddha’s teachings and began all of his recitations with “Thus did I hear”. The use of this phrase in The Life of Milarepa implies that Milarepa’s word comes from a place of enlightenment and gives Milarepa’s life a resemblance to the life of the Buddha himself.
The Life of Milarepa and Collections of Songs of Milarepa are considered by many to be Tsangnyon Heruka’s greatest contributions to the study of Buddhism. He lived from approximately the year 1452-1507 and was born in Tsang. He led a rather eccentric life that began with studying as a novice monk in his youth. However at the age of 21 Heruka renounced his vows and spent the rest of his life as a nomadic yogi. He studied yoga under several different teachers until becoming particularly involved in the Kagyu tradition of yoga and spending years on Tsari, a major sacred mountain in solitary retreat. He was once seen covered in human ashes and blood with human fingers and toes decorating his hair. Tibetans interpreted his unorthodox lifestyle to be a sign of spiritual enlightenment. Potentially this style of wearing human remains originated from an Indian sect of yoga practitioners called “Kapalikas” or “skull-bearers”. They are known for adorning human remains as well as carrying human skulls and bones.
Because Heruka was particularly concerned with the Kagyu style of Buddhism, Milarepa’s story was of intense interest to him. The Kagyu school is also known as the “Oral Lineage” or “whispered transmission school” and is recognized as one of the six major schools of Tibetan Buddhism with the other five being Nyingma, Sakya, Jonang, Gelug, and Bon. Kagyu Buddhism was founded during the second coming of Buddhism to Tibet, making it a relatively recent development in the history of Tibetan Buddhism. Kagyu tradition places a particularly large emphasis on the relationship between student and guru, which is likely why after the style began developing, soon many schools had arisen and many individualized styles of Kagyu quickly developed.
Marpa, an integral character in Milarepa’s development, is actually credited with much of the development of Kagyu within Tibet. Marpa actually travelled to India and Nepal several times while training as a translator and searching for spiritual guidance. Marpa married the Lady Dagmema, another influential individual who played a large roll in the life of Milarepa. Marpa also took eight concubines and wished to pass his teaching and prestige down to his oldest son, as was the tradition of passing lessons along the lines of heredity in Tibet, but his eldest son died at an early age. As a result, the opportunity arose for Marpa to pass his teachings along to another individual. Eventually Milarepa proved to be the individual chosen to carry on Marpa’s teachings. Milarepa eventually passed down these same teachings to numerous influential Tibetan students such as Gampopa and Rechung Dorje Drakpa, both great scholars and yogis. Today, there are twelve different branches of the Kagyu lineage each with distinct practices and beliefs all rooted in the original Kagyu beliefs.
While some monks pressed Heruka on the justice behind his seemingly absurd actions, Heruka was known to actively defend his practices through arguments backed by accurate quotations of scripture. He acquired many students and also composed many religious songs. Suring his life, he carried much influence and was even able to mediate wars because of his status as a religious leader. It is said that in about 1488, Heruka completed the Life of Milarepa, which became one of the first texts to be printed using the woodblock printing method. This method expedited the speed of production, making Heruka’s version more readily available than was the norm for the time. His objective in preserving and spreading the story of Milarepa is said to have been to promote the teachings of early Kagyu masters. This theory coincides with the objectives of his other major life works, including the collection of traditional Kagyu aural transmissions and the biography of Marpa Lotswana.
The Life of Milarepa is a tool not only for understanding a historic Buddhist’s path to liberation, but also for gaining insight into social interactions in Tibet around the year 1000. The story, although written down hundreds of years after the event took place, gives detail into social hierarchies, marriage expectations, architectural and artistic preferences, and the blossoming of Buddhism within Tibet. With this being said, there is a likelihood of some of the story being distorted granted that the story was, for hundreds of years, only orally passed down. After it was written, many versions presented conflicting details. In addition to this controversy, the most famous English version not only was forced to select one story to present, but also had the obstacle of translating the story in the most accurate way possible. Often times when historic culturally rich stories are translated some of the significance and cultural nuisances are lost in translation.
Milarepa also exemplifies the unity of the interconnectedness of the Theravada, Mahayana, and Vajrayana Buddhist teachings. Additionally, his life seems to indicate that humility and poverty are not life setbacks, but rather are opportunities for personal development. In addition, his perseverance in the face of adversity and then the achievement of enlightenment indicate the importance of discipline for empancipation. Not only is Milarepa’s life story an inspiration, but also the religious songs and poems he wrote, which were often not written but instead just spontaneously sung which he was in the state of enlightenment, have inspired Tibetans for generations. Additionally, the cave in which Milarepa once lived now boasts a statue of Milarepa and has been consecrated in his name.
Milarepa’s influence today within Tibetan Buddhism cannot be disputed. Not only does his life story share similar elements of that of Shakyamuni himself, but also the students he taught and the religious poems and songs he wrote carried down important elements of Kagyu Buddhism. Through the timeless theme of perseverance and his life’s emphasis on spirituality, he story boasts numerous lessons that Tibetan Buddhism preaches.
DEVELOPMENTS IN IRANIAN NUCLEAR PROLIFERATIONS
Donald Trump has asserted that the the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), colloquially called the “Iran Nuclear Deal” is “one of the worst and most one-sided transactions that the United States has ever entered into.” With the controversy surrounding the potency of The Iran Deal, the historical context, current state of affairs, and implications of changing the deal must be considered in order to make a judgment of the actions the United States to secure it’s objective of national security. This project aims to answer the legal question: "Has Iran violated the 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action?" This paper will also discuss the recommended legal proceedings for the United States in regard to Iranian nuclear proliferation within the historical and political contexts.
Tension between the United States and Iran over Iran’s Nuclear Weapons proliferation date back decades. Soon after the bombing in Hiroshima and Nagasaki, President Eisenhower addressed the United Nations on December 8, 1945 in a speech entitled “Atoms for Peace”. This speech and the accompanying Atoms for Peace program aimed to limit the arms race that followed World War II. Iran signed the civil nuclear cooperation treaty in 1957. Concurrently the International Atomic Energy Agency(IAEA) was founded in order to monitor the production of nuclear weapons and promote peace (Agreement on the Privileges and Immunities of the Agency, 1959). The IAEA has three main missions: to promote peaceful uses of nuclear energy, to enforce safeguards that prohibit nuclear energy for military use, and promoting safety for the nuclear practices permitted. Iran joined the International Atomic Energy Agency in 1958. Throughout the 1970’s with support from the United States, Iran began developing a nuclear power program. After Iran’s Islamic revolution in 1979, the United States and other western powers were no longer involved in Iran’s nuclear development. Without Western oversight Iran opened a nuclear research center in Isfahan in December of 1984. With growing concern for Iran’s nuclear development President Bill Clinton signed a law in on March 14th, 2000 that called for economic sanctions against individuals and organizations that contributed to the Iranian nuclear development(Iran Nonproliferation Act of 2000, 2000).
Today’s controversy ignited when IAEA Director General Mohamed ElBaradei visited Iran on February 21st, 2003 to encourage Iran compliance with faster and more dynamic access to nuclear plants. Iran refused to the proposition and concern for the intentions of Iran’s nuclear programs increased. However the IAEA continued to support Iran in the sense that they continued to issue reports claiming that Iran seemed to comply with the demands of the Non-Proliferation treaty until August of 2003 when IAEA inspectors reportedly discovered some highly enriched uranium in the Nantanz uranium enrichment plant. Iran asserted that the uranium in question was leftover uranium from before Iran had possession of the equipment, as the equipment had been purchased from other countries. Iran then agreed in November of 2003 to stop enriching Uranium and in the following month on December 13th, 2003, Iran signed the Nuclear Non-Proliferation treaty that allowed for unannounced inspections of their nuclear facilities(Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, 1968).
In 2004 the IAEA began to find uranium enriched beyond the agreed upon percentage. Iran claimed that this uranium, in addition to the additional centrifuge that Iran began using again, were all aimed at energy production, not nuclear weapons development. On September 11th, 2005, Manouchhr Mottaki, Iran’s foreign minister, claimed Iran was planning to build additional nuclear facilities and that research at the Nantanz uranium plant would begin again but all within the conditions of IAEA agreement. Concerned over these nuclear developments, Great Britian, France, and Germany referred Iran to the United Nations Security Council. Then in February of 2006, Iranian President Ahmadinejad announced that Iran would no longer be cooperating with the IAEA. The IAEA then revealed on August 31, 2006 that Iran had missed the deadline as required by IAEA agreements to terminate their plans to enrich uranium. As a result, the United Nations Security Council voted unanimously that Iran should undergo sanctions for violation of the IAEA agreement. In the United Nations resolution 1747, the United Nations employed sanctions against Iran and seized the assets of 28 organizations and individuals who contributed to the development of Iran’s nuclear program. Reports continued to support that Iran was expanding it’s nuclear program, including a letter to the IAEA from Iran on September 21st, 2009, that stated that Iran had a second undocumented nuclear facility underground at a military base.
Inspectors from the IAEA proceed to visit and inspect this underground facility. Following this inspection, the IAEA stated its concern that Iran may secretly be developing nuclear warheads. On December 5th, 2010 Ali Akbar Salehi, Iran’s atomic chief proclaimed that Iran possessed a self-sustaining nuclear system and was producing yellowcake, a step in refining uranium that can be used for nuclear weapons. In the following month on January 8th 2011, Salehi stated that Iran had its own supply and system for creating nuclear fuel plates and nuclear rods. On September 5th, 2011, Salehi stated that Iran would permit full supervision of its nuclear systems if the United Nations lifted the crippling economic sanctions. The European Union responded that Iran must abide by the IAEA’s rules before any sanctions are lifted. Tensions rose as the IAEA reported on November 8th, 2011 that it had serious concerns over the development of nuclear bombs in Iran. On January 23rd, 2012 the European Union announced it planned to ban of all Iranian oil and petroleum. In February of 2012 the IAEA reports that requests to visit the Parchin military base were denied. Then in May of 2012, the IAEA reportedly found that uranium at a plant near Qom were enriched to 27%, 7% higher than the previous inspection. Meetings between the United States, France, Russia, China, Great Britian, Germany, and Iran were held in June of 2012 in an attempt to resolve the nuclear conflict, but no conclusion could be reached (Iran's Nuclear Capabilities Fast Facts, 2017).
Although Iranian President Hassan Rouhani insisted on September 24th, 2013 at a United Nations General Assembly Speech that “Nuclear weapons and other weapons of mass destruction have no place in Iran’s security and defense doctrine, and contradict our fundamental religious and ethical convictions” (Hovsepian-Bearce, 2016). However, a United Nations report issued on August 30th, 2012 a month before President Hassan Rouhani’s assertion, claimed that Iran had increased it’s high grade uranium production. On November 24th, 2013 progress is made with an agreement made between the United States, Great Britain, China, Russia, Germany, France, and Iran. In this agreement in exchange for limited nuclear production, Iran received lighter sanctions. However, the international community recognized that additional legislature would be required in order to absolve the issue. Not only were the Iranian people greatly suffering from the economic sanctions, but the international community was still largely dissatisfied with Iran’s nuclear programs.
On July 14th, 2015 a satisfactory agreement was reached entitled the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA). The agreement called for the two-thirds reduction of Iranian centrifuges, the ban of uranium enrichment entirely at designated facilities, and the limitation of uranium research solely to the Nantanz nuclear development center. The deal is said to change the amout of time it would take for Iran to develop nuclear weapons from two to three months, to about one year. This deal received praise from the United Nations Security Council, as the council unanimously voted in favor to adopt resolution 2231 urging the adoption of the JCPOA (United Nations Security Council Resolution 2231, 2015).
The Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action clarifies how Iran's access to nuclear weapons will be limited. The main components limited by the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action are that the Iran's current stockpile will be drastically reduced, the level to which Iran is allowed to enrich the uranium needed to build nuclear weapons will be drastically reduced, the number of centrifuges that enrich uranium will be reduced by two-thirds, thorough inspections will be enacted, and the threat of sanctions if the treaty is violated will remain immanent.
President Obama was a major contributor and proponent of the Iran Nuclear Deal. As the deal developed, Obama emphasized the need for limiting Iran's nuclear development while continuing to monitor its nuclear plants. When the deal was accomplished, Obama announced, as evidenced in the above speech on January 17th, 2016, that because the deal cut off all methods for Iran to develop nuclear weapons, the sanctions on Iran are no longer necessary.
With the objective of improving international security through limiting Iranian nuclear development, Obama claimed that because all avenues for Iran to develop a nuclear weapon have been eliminated through the JCPOA, Obama claims that this deal is sufficient in securing international security, as evidenced by the above photo indicating the dramatic increase in time it would take for Iran to develop nuclear weapons now that the JCPOA has entered into effect. However after implementation of this act, in March of 2016, Iran was found test firing missiles. Although these practice missile firings did not directly violate JCPOA, members of the international community feared that this practice firing would lead to real firing and the accompanying effect of violating JCPOA (Iran's Missile Tests: 2017, 2017).
After President Trump took office, Iran tested medium-range ballistic missiles in January of 2017 (Iran's Missile Tests: 2017, 2017). In response to the missiles tested in January, the United States Treasury issued sanctions on 25 individuals and companies involved with Iran’s nuclear development and Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps’ Qods Force (Executive Order 13382", 2005). President Trump was able to enact these deals as the result of a complication between the JCPOA in the United States. Part of the difficulty in employing the JCPOA in the United States is that it was never ratified by Congress, so for continual following of the deal, the President must every 90 days issue a statement that Iran is abiding by the agreement. With President Trump's continual complaints that Iran is in violation of the treaty, the United States is an obvious contender to attempt to withdraw from the deal. The United States National Security Adviser Michael Flynn claimed that these sanctions were justified when Iran began developing ballistic missiles with abilities to launch nuclear bombs, an act Flynn claimed to constitute a breech of the previous United Nations Security Council Resolution (Lemire, J. Superville, D, 2017).
These applied sanctions proved controversial among the international community. Representatives from numerous countries spoke out against the application of sanctions because Iran is reported to have been in complete compliance with the terms of the treaty. President Trump argues that although Iran is abiding by the treaty, Iran continues to instigate violence in the Middle East through the testing of nuclear weapons. Therefore, Trump claims that although Iran is abiding by the explicit terms of the treaty, Iran is not abiding by the "spirit" of the treaty that aims to promote peace worldwide. Additionally, Trump has asserted that the current restrictions on Iran are not strict enough, and still allow Iran to make nuclear weapons, although evidence from the IAEA does not support his claims. In Trump’s address to the United Nations Security Council on September 19th, 2017, he claimed that the agreement was an “embarrassment” to America (Lemire, J. Superville, D, 2017) .
Conversely, many legal experts, like the European Union Policy Chief Federica Mogherini in the above video, have asserted that because the agreement is not a unilateral agreement between the United States and Iran, if the United States were to denounce the treaty, the terms of the treaty would still be upheld in the rest of the world. Additionally, the United States would lose a great deal of credibility as the result of proving that diplomatic engagements with the United States could be overturned with the transfer of power through presidency, or with the change of will of the president. Not only would the United States be frowned upon for withdrawing from a treaty without abiding by the necessary process to legally withdraw from an international agreement, but the United States would also be faulted for destabilizing the treaty and therefore retracting progress in the limitation of Iran's nuclear development.
Many also argue that although Iran may be wrongly instigating violence in the Middle East, it is not in violation of the JCPOA and the JCPOA has been successful at its objective of limiting Iran’s nuclear program development and as a result should remain established. Iranian President Rouhani claimed that, “It will be a great pity if this agreement were destroyed by the rogue newcomers to the world of politics”, indicating his disdain for Trump’s statements. Iran has also threatened employing sanctions against the United States and withdrawling completely from the JCPOA if Donald Trump were to employ sanctions against Iran (Hovsepian-Bearce, 2017).
Because of the national security threat of Iran develop nuclear weapons and because of their dishonest behavior regarding nuclear weapons in the past, the United Nations Security Council rightly has jurisdiction over the development of Iranian Nuclear Weapons. However, with the current JCPOA in place and the progress it has made in terms of slowing the development of nuclear weapons and improving transparency into Iran’s nuclear programs, the program should stay in place. Also, if there were fundamental problems with the agreement, which the evidence does not suggest, then the proper way to address the issue would be through the International Court. Denouncing and refusing to abide by the treaty without an alternative plan and without regard to prior commitment provide little credibility to Donald Trump’s assertions. Legal experts question that Donald Trump's threats to withdraw from the JCPOA threaten America's reputation internationally. If America sets a precedent of withdrawing from treaties once it determines the treaty undesirable, then other countries may not find value in engaging in diplomatic efforts with the United States in the future.
As evidenced by the crippling economic sanctions of the mid 2000s, Iran recognizes the devastating impacts of worldwide economic sanctions. This threat is believe by most to be a strong deterrent for violation of the non-proliferation treaty. Some discrepancy does lie in the depth to which these sanctions deter Iran. For example, Dr. Hassan Hakimian, director of the London Middle East Institute and economics expert said in an interview in 2012 that Iran's economy was actually fairing much better than is portrayed in the media. He also claimed that "Iran has been expecting these sanctions for quite a while, so they are, in a sense, better prepared than most people might realize" (Hakimian, 2012). The data that has been reported on the effects of the sanctions on Iran's economy have included significant gaps in information and there is questionable credibility to the data provided by the Iranian government. While the sanctions applied mostly apply to oil exports, iran is not completely dependent upon oil exports for it's economy. However, nuclear proliferation experts claim that with the depth of investigation that the IAEA is permitted to employ in Iran, they are almost one hundred percent sure that if Iran were to develop nuclear weapons, they would very soon be discovered. Therefore, although the sanctions alone may not provide incentive to halt the development of a nuclear weapon, the sanctions are still complementary incentive to the thorough investigation, as outlined in the below photo.
Supporters of Donald Trump’s call for action against the JCPOA include the President of Israel, Benjamin Netanyahu. Israel is one of the United States' longstanding allies in the Middle East, but has opposed the Iran Nuclear Deal. Other United States allies in the Middle East such as Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates, and Bahrain have expressed concern for Iran's increasing aggression and the threat of Iran developing nuclear weapons. While maintaining these allies in the Middle East is incredibly important for the United States and the opinions of these nations should be heard in full. Ultimately, if the United States determined that the current JCPOA was insufficient, the United States would still need to either make a unilateral treaty between Iran and the United States, or adjudicate legislature that proposed a new plan to replace the JCPOA. If the United States proposed a new, more effective plan that were ratified and entered into effect by the nations party to the JCPOA, then it would prevail over the current JCPOA. However, with other countries still expressing satisfaction with the Iranian nuclear deal, and evidence from the IAEA that the Iranian deal is accomplishing its desired effects, it is unlikely that other countries would adopt a new treaty.
The 2015 Join Comprehensive Plan of Action was a monumental step in the right direction for the limitation of Iran's nuclear proliferation. The deal not only allows for strict monitoring of Iran's nuclear development, as verified by nuclear development experts, but also represents a willingness of all countries involved to compromise in order to effect international security. Evidence reported by the IAEA indicates that not only is Iran in compliance with the JCPOA, but the current deterrence methods are sufficient deterrence from developing nuclear weapons. If somehow Iran did prioritize development of nuclear weapons, the development process would be significantly slowed and the inspections upon Iranian nuclear facilities are thorough enough to detect the development. Additionally, if the development of nuclear weapons were discovered, under the JCPOA, the United Nations would have jurisdiction to apply strict sanctions and confiscate the nuclear development equipment. If the United States were to withdraw from this treaty, it would not only reflect poorly on United States diplomacy, but might also cause Iran to withdraw from the treaty, destabilizing the international agreement and opening the door for Iran to develop nuclear weapons in private. Ultimately, the United States withdrawing from this treaty could lead to the mandatory use of force as a last result if Iran begins developing nuclear weapons in private, after withdrawing from this treaty.
References
“Agreement on the Privileges and Immunities of the Agency.” 17 August 1959. International Atomic Energy Agency. https://www.iaea.org/publications/documents/infcircs/agreement-privileges-and-immunities-agency. Accessed on 10/10/17.
“Council Regulation (EC) No 423/2007 of 19 April 2007 Concerning Restrictive Measures Against Iran.” 19 April 2007. Official Journal of the European Union. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2007:103:0001:0023:en:PDF . Accessed on 10/10/17.
“Executive Order 13382.” 29 June 2005. U.S. Department of State. https://www.state.gov/t/isn/c22080.htm. Accessed on 11/10/17.
Hovsepian-Bearce, Y. The Political Ideology of Atatollah Khamenei: Out of the Mouth of the Supreme Leader of Iran. (2016). Taylor and Francis Group. “Iran Missile Proliferation Sanctions Act of 1997.” 22 May 1998. https://www.congress.gov/bill/105th-congress/house-bill/2709 . Accessed on 10/10/17.
“Iran’s Missle Tests: 2017” 1 August 2017. The Iran Primer. http://iranprimer.usip.org/blog/2017/aug/01/iran%E2%80%99s-missile-tests-2017. Accessed on 11/10/17.
“Iran Nonproliferation Act of 2000” 14 March 2000. U.S. Department of State. https://www.state.gov/t/isn/c15234.htm. Accessed on 11/10/17.
“Iran’s Nuclear Capabilities Fast Facts” 21 September 2017. CNN. http://www.cnn.com/2013/11/07/world/meast/irans-nuclear-capabilities-fast-facts/index.html . Accessed on 11/10/17.
“Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action.” 14 July 2015. U.S. Department of State. https://www.state.gov/e/eb/tfs/spi/iran/jcpoa/ . Accessed on 10/10/17.
Lemire, J. Superville, D. “WATCH: At UN, Trumps threatens to ‘totally destroy’ North Korea”. 19 September 2017. PBS News Hour. https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/un-trump-threatens-totally-destroy-north-korea. Accessed on 11/10/17.
“Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons.” 12 June 1968. International Atomic Energy Agency. https://www.iaea.org/publications/documents/treaties/npt. Accessed on 10/10/17.
“United Nations Security Council Resolution 1737”. 23 December 2006. United Nations Security Council. http://www.un.org/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=S/RES/1737%282006%29. Accessed on 10/10/17.
“United Nations Security Council Resolution 2231”. 20 July 2015. United Nations Security Council. http://unscr.com/en/resolutions/doc/2231. Accessed on 11/10/17.
TRUMP'S ROLE IN THE ISRAEL-PALESTINE TWO STATE SOLUTION
The controversial “two-state solution” to the Israel-Palestine conflict would, as the name suggests, allow Israel and Palestine to coexist as independent, neighboring nations. Although Judeo-Islamic disputes rampaged the Middle East for centuries, the United Nations agreed that only a two-state solution can bring peace. As current U.N. Secretary-General António Guterres articulated, “There is no alternative to the two-state solution. There is no Plan B,” reaffirming the sovereignty of both nations. The U.N. first proposed the two-state solution in a 1947 Security Council Resolution that, in an attempt to ameliorate conflict, declared Israel and Palestine sovereign; this same resolution declared Jerusalem an “international zone” owned by none, open to all, and run by the U. N.. For decades, Jerusalem’s jurisdiction represented political and religious power in the Middle East, as it contains the holiest site in Judaism, the third holiest mosque in Islam, and sacred ground in Christianity, making it among the most prized territories in the world. Neither the Palestinians nor the Israelis wished to sacrifice rule of Jerusalem. Both were also concerned for the wellbeing of their respective peoples that lived under the rule of the other group, i.e., Muslims in Israel and Jews in Palestine.. As a result, both groups contested the two-state solution; and despite resistance, the U. N. approved the plan.
Within the year, the 1948 Palestine War, known in Hebrew as the War of Independence, erupted. The first phase of the war consisted of civil war in Palestine, originating from tensions between Jewish and Muslim populations. At the time, the British ruled Palestine. However, in 1948, the United Nations General Assembly Resolution 181 was issued. Palestine gained independence and the U.N. recognized Israel as an independent nation. Israel’s militarily then, with support from Jordan, backed the Jewish side in the Palestine War, marking the start of the war’s second phase. When Israel emerged victorious, it illegally annexed portions of Palestinian territory. Israel and Jordan also annexed West Jerusalem and East Jerusalem, respectively. Persistent violence and terrorism led to the Six-Day War in 1967, during which Israel also seized East Jerusalem.
Traditionally, the U.S. spearheaded efforts in favor of the two-state solution; it attempted to establish the solution during the 1993 “Oslo Peace Process” and the 2000 Camp David Summit. However, American Congress has not always supported this decision: In 1995, they passed the Jerusalem Embassy Act, which would move America’s Israeli embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem. As the U.S. always holds its embassies in a country’s capital, this move would acknowledge Jerusalem as Israel's capital. However, every president since this act’s passage employed the presidential waiver built into the bill every six months to prevent the relocation due to national security interests in the region.
Israel-Palestine borders under the 1947 U.N. Plan (left) and current borders | Wikimedia Commons
President Donald Trump made two unprecedented claims in addressing this peace process. First, Trump acknowledged Jerusalem as the official capital of Israel and claimed the recognition as “a long overdue step to advance the peace process.” As a result, Trump intends to follow through with the Jerusalem Embassy Act once the U.S. logistically prepares to build a new embassy in Jerusalem. Second, Trump announced that we should gain peace in the Middle East by any means, not necessarily the two-state solution, a further deviation from U.S. precedent. Critics assert that Trump’s lack of commitment to the two-state solution will undermine peace efforts. Failure to support the two-state solution also indicates direct opposition to the U.N. .
Since Trump’s recognition of Jerusalem as Israel’s capital, the U.N. voted to condemn Trump’s recognition with 128 members in favor and 9 against. U.N.Secretary-General Guterres criticized Trump’s unilateral peace tactics, claiming that jurisdiction over Jerusalem should be determined through negotiations, not an effort to initiate discussion. Some of the U.S.’s strongest allies spoke out against Trump’s approach. Federica Mogherini, the European Union’s high representative referenced the 1980 U.N. Security Council Resolution, which condemns Israel’s annexation of East Jerusalem to emphasize that the recognition of Jerusalem as Israel’s capital does not affirm a pre-existing reality. British Prime Minister Theresa May labeled Trump’s statements, “unhelpful in terms of prospects for peace in the region,” French President Emmanuel Macron called the decision “regrettable,” and German Chancellor Angela Merkel issued that Germany, “does not support this position, because the status of Jerusalem is to be resolved in the framework of a two-state solution.” Many have interpreted Trump’s decision as a direct offense to the Muslim community such as the U.S. ally, Saudi Arabia, who called the decision a “flagrant provocation to Muslims.”
The U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. Nikki Haley confirmed that the U.S. will move its embassy to Jerusalem regardless of the U.Nations’ condemnation. When the U.N. voted to condemn Trump’s decision, he threatened to defund US foreign aid to these countries claiming “We’re watching these votes. Let them vote against us. We’ll save a lot. We don’t care.” Trump’s political opponents labeled him a hazard to democracy in the U.N., as countries must choose between voicing their opinion and receiving help.
Currently, 86 nations hold embassies in Tel Aviv, but if the U.S.follows through with its embassy relocation, it will do so alone. However, both Guatemala and the Czech Republic have expressed interest in moving their embassies to Jerusalem since Trump’s recognition, indicating that he may influence other countries to consider the change. Although unlikely that many will make the change, even if a few follow his lead, breaking the international community’s trust will prove difficult to repair.