In July of 2015, Iran, France, China, Russia, the United States, and the United Kingdom, all reunited in Vienna, to sign an agreement known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA). This deal aims to limit the Iranian nuclear program, in exchange for economic sanctions relief. The JCPOA has come up again as a discussion in MUNC 2018 on whether or not they should attempt to reinstate the deal with possibly more countries involved. The big question is, can this treaty be reinstated successfully, and will big economic factors limit the success of this deal?
The JCPOA does not have the support of the United States. While the US believes there should be sanctions and restrictions as to who and where nuclear weapons could be developed, they state that the UN cannot make any drastic changes in terms of nuclear disarmament. The US also believes that it would be impossible to convince certain countries to reduce their nuclear arms. Without the support of the United States, it will be difficult for other countries to spark a massive change in terms of weapons of mass destruction.
While the United States may be against it, many countries are pushing for complete disarmament of nuclear weapons. While this may seem impossible, other countries are at least in support of a new agreement which falls along the lines of the JCPOA. The delegate from Afghanistan is putting forward terms of a group coalition in order to come up with a whole new JCPOA which is in favor to many other delegates. While this would limit works of nuclear weapons, it would not limit threats of nuclear warfare.
The JCPOA has been effective in Iran as it has limited the threats of nuclear weapons due to economic sanctions. The discussion seems to be revolving around whether or not this agreement could be as beneficial to other countries as it has been in Iran. While there is no clear conclusion in sight, global reduction of nuclear weapons is being appeased by most countries here. However, support from more stable countries such as the United States will be crucial in order to make real change.
Andrew Singer - New York Times