While many Americans were busy preparing for the Thanksgiving holiday last week, a historic pact was reached between Iran and six world powers, including the U.S. and China.
One of the pact’s significant accomplishments is that Iran has agreed to stop enriching its uranium supplies beyond 5 percent, according to the New York Times.
The agreement comes at a time when the international community scolded Iran for keeping stockpiles of uranium that are enriched at 20 percent.
In exchange for Iran’s compliance, the six other world powers have agreed to lift some sanctions currently placed on Iran, according to Reuters.
Although this deal is far from perfect, one can hope it will lead to a more lasting and definitive agreement in the near future.
According to the New York Times, the pact will last for only six months. Negotiators hope to make a more comprehensive pact in the coming months.
One might think that such a compromise involving Iran and six world powers would be popular.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu publicly disapproved of the deal and called it a “historic mistake,” according to the Washington Post.
The problem with stubborn individuals like Netanyahu is that they fail to understand how compromises are reached.
By its very definition, compromise is a trade-off between two parties that often have two completely different objectives.
Allowing Iran to keep some of its nuclear programs is essential if a deal is to be reached in any case.
Punishing Iran continuously and not allowing it to retain any of its nuclear programs would be regrettable.
Why should Iran be continuously punished?
The fundamental question regarding the Iran nuclear situation is whether the country has a right to do as it wants in nuclear matters.
Should Iran be allowed to develop its nuclear program despite international concern?
The question is a complicated one, albeit.
In theory, Iran should be allowed to use nuclear technology to develop clean energy programs.
Nuclear power is practiced in many countries throughout the world, including the U.S. and France, and Iran is not an anomaly.
Whether it has the right to develop a nuclear weapon, however, is unclear.
Depriving Iran of its autonomous right to use nuclear power would be disconcerting.
In the future, the international community must recognize the balance between giving Iran its self-autonomous rights and preventing it from possessing the capability of going to war with neighboring nations.
Regardless of what the future may hold, last week’s agreement could have many short-term advantages.
For the first time since 1979, it seems as though the U.S. and Iran can finally sit down and agree with one another on specific issues.
For two countries that have had such a poor history, this agreement could re-unify two once-sparring nations.
“That diplomacy opened up a new path toward a world that is more secure,” President Barack Obama said in a New York Times article, “a future in which we can verify that Iran’s nuclear program is peaceful and that it cannot build a nuclear weapon.”
Let’s hope this peace will last.
Shane Newell is a junior journalism major and the opinions editor at the Daily 49er.