The nuclear deal passed by the UN security council, and led by the US, involving Iran has been at the forefront of political debates recently. Because of its relevance in foreign policy and my interest in foreign affairs especially in the Middle East I chose this topic. I want to focus on a topic that directly affects the United States, and the middle east at this moment. The question I am raising is "Why is the Iran nuclear deal dangerous, and proof that the UN needs to be formed. The deal does not enough to ensure the stability of the middle east, and the it does not protect US security. First and foremost the deal does not do enough to dismantle Iran's uranium stockpile. Uranium is a key element needed in the creation of a nuclear bomb and currently Iran's nuclear stockpile is 660 pounds. The deal will eliminate 98% of this stockpile, but it will allow Iran to keep enriching uranium which is needed to create the bomb. As a result, their break out time, or the time needed to produce the bomb, will remain the same. The deal does nothing to protect our security because it allows Iran to continue the process necessary for constructing a nuclear bomb.  When it comes to the deal, I do not have a lot of experience. The only experience I have that pertains to this topic is my studies of the Middle Eastern region in an Asian Studies class in high school. Through this class I was able to learn in great detail about middle eastern religion and culture, and study on the United Nations. Because of this knowledge I have a greater understanding of the middle east operates, and why the deal was agreed upon. As a result, my qualifications to write about this topic are answered by my knowledge of the region, and my interest in foreign affairs. That knowledge and background give me the necessary background information, and resources to analyze and study the topic.

When conducting my research, I first had to gain a basic understanding of the Iran nuclear deal. I decided to turn to BBC News to lay out an un-biased description of the details of the deal. The article titled "Iran Nuclear Deal: Key Details" discusses what the deal does to dismantle Iran's nuclear capabilities. It discusses how the number of centrifuges Iran will be able to use will reduce by 80%. A centrifuge is a machine used to separate isotopes from the uranium. By doing this it makes the enriched uranium capable of being used in a nuclear bomb. Another key detail of the deal is it talks about Iran's uranium stockpile, which will be reduced 98%, but Iran can keep enriching the uranium that's left over. That still gives it the capability of producing a nuclear bomb, and it still has enough uranium to do that. On top of that Iran's heavy water reactors, which are used to create plutonium, will be redesigned. By not shutting these down Iran still has the capability of producing enough plutonium to create a bomb. If Iran adheres to these sanctions put in place by the P5+1 group of world powers (United States, Germany, France, Russia, China, and the UK), and it will gain access to over 100 billion dollars in frozen assets. The most dangerous sanction that will be lifted is that Iran will be allowed to reenter the ballistic missile market. This poses a direct threat to its neighbor Israel, who Iran has vowed to destroy, and other countries in the region. To ensure Iran follows the terms of the deal the International Atomic Energy Association (IAEA) will have access to Iranian nuclear facilities at all times. However, if a nuclear site is not officially declared a nuclear site by the Iranian government, it is not allowed to be inspected. As soon as the IAEA confirm Iran is adhering to the terms of the deal, the sanctions will be lifted. This article is published by the BBC, and has no individual author mentioned. With that said the BBC is very credible to write on the topic as a result of its 5 correspondents in the Middle East. It maintains a constant presence in the middle east, and has a section of its website dedicated to reporting on news in the middle east. The artcile's main goal is put forward an informative piece that lays out statistics, and details of the deal in order to make the public aware of the details of the deal. When it comes to details of major political deals, the credibility of the source is important. You don't want false information, regarding the topic you are researching. As a result, the article is an unbiased descriptive summary of the deal. There are no opinions mentioned or politicians quoted, it is simply a description. This article is an informative article on the deal, and as a result, it is unbiased.

Article 1718 from the UN security council from 2016 focuses on North Korea's nuclear missile test. It was unanimously passed by the UN Security Council, consisting of the US, China, France, Russia, and the UK. The reason this source is important is because it is an example of a failed UN attempt to prohibit a country from possessing nuclear weapons. Even worse is that the details of this article are very similar to the details of the deal Iran agreed to. The sanctions of Article 1718 are similar sanctions that are going to be lifted if Iran adheres to its deal. The article stemmed from an incident in 2006 when North Korea launched a test missile that was "condemned" by the United Nations. What followed what was the decision to place sanctions on North Korea, and dismantle its nuclear program. The article was passed in 2006 and approved unanimously by the  security council. The article starts off introducing the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, which states that North Korea is not allowed to possess nuclear weapons. The council decided to prohibit large arms, nuclear, and training. It also all of froze North Koreas assets. All of these sanctions were also placed on Iran, and now those sanctions will be lifted from Iran. Furthermore, it stated that North Korea would no longer receive humanitarian aid unless it dismantled its nuclear program assets. Once again eerily similar to the Iran deal. In order to monitor North Korea, a committee was established by the UN to monitor over them. What Article 1718 does is reflect the United Nations and other nations views of North Korea's nuclear weapon program. The major interest of Artcile 1718 is to protect the global community from a "reckless nation". Iran has also been called a reckless nation, and now they will have the capability to posses a nuclear bomb. As a result, it very biased because the nations in the council are trying to protect their own national security. However, this resolution did nothing to stop North Korea. In the new recently North Korea has been firing short range ballistic missile tests. Those sanctions are completely being ignored, and North Korea is once again a threat. The United Nations is a league of nations that acts as a global court where nations pass resolutions to exist peacefully. It is a way fro nations cooperate with each other and reach agreements. Its prominence in foreign affairs and global issues is unmistakable. The credibility of Article 1718, which was the result of a UN council meeting should not be in question. It is an article that was adopted as a UN resolution by the Security Council, the most powerful countries in the world. North Korea is another instance of a failed UN nuclear deal, and its attempt to keep the world safe.


The third article I chose is titled "Netanyahu launches an all-out assault on the Iran Nuclear Deal. It is a summary of the speech made by Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu after the deal was first implemented. It focuses on the dangers that Iran will now pose to its greatest enemy, Israel. In the article it mentions how Israel and Saudi Araba are fearing a nuclear attack from Iran now that its sanctions are lifted. To confirm this, in the new recently, Iran tested a ballistic missile and the missile read "Death to Israel". This article was written one year ago, and today its becoming relevant. Now Iran is testing ballistic missiles, and it is allowed to because of the lifted sanctions. With that said Israel is willing to use military action to prevent Iran from a acquiring a nuclear weapon. That would create further conflict in the region, and cause more bloodshed. Netanyahu then goes on to say the UN is engaging in unjustified "Israel-bashing". This is creating tension between the UN and Israel, as well as President Obama and Netanyahu. This article was written by Louis Charbonneau who is Reuters United Nations Bureau chief in New York. Reuters is a news source that has developed a reputation for getting news out first. Furthermore, most major new sources subscribe to Reuters for information. It works in 94 countries and 200 languages. With that said it has a team of journalists situated in the middle east who are all qualified to write about this topic. The article written by Charbonneau is an unbiased summary of the speech made by Netanyahu to the UN.

After research it is clear that my research question can be argued. There is enough information about how detrimental the deal is, and how similar it it to the failed North Korea resolution. My plan is to argue against it, and propose a plan to change the deal, and how the UN is conducted. This gives me the ability to argue against the deal and put forward changes to make the deal more effective in serving the purpose of the United States' interests. The deal needs to stop Iran from being able to enrich uranium, and to shut down all of its heavy water reactors. Otherwise it is still a threat to the US, and Israel. On top of that, it gives me opportunity to recommend a change in the way the UN operates. Among my sources I found found very few discrepancies. That was because my research was done on different events that have taken place. I did notice some similarities between the UN nuclear deals with North Korea and Iran. For example, the freezing of assets, in the hopes to dismantle a nuclear program. In the future if I have to revise my research question it would be focused more on Un failures to promote and protect human rights, and why it needs to be reformed The threat of global security is what make my topic worth covering.
