Fall 2017 JPI

statements approved at home. Under Rouhani, actual debates and discussions were conducted and
interests and vital points were put on the table.
Iran’s main interests were to first and foremost lift the oppressive sanctions and have better
ties with the western world. P5+1 interests were to stop Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons. If Iran
continues an enrichment program, its economy will be decimated again by international sanctions,
resulting in economic pressure which will make Iran’s leaders return to the negotiating table seeking
relief. Until then, the world will have one less nuclear power. The previous position of the status quo
provided no benefit to any party in the JCPOA, therefore a shift from positional to interest-based
bargaining occurred to advance each parties’ interests because of the stalemate that positional
bargaining had created. Therefore, we can conclude an interest-based negotiation occurred because of
the way negotiation rounds progressed towards an economically beneficial deal that was not
considered in past rounds.
While it may be too early to evaluate the JCPOA’s consequences, there is a larger and more
immediate benefit to the negotiations that has occurred. The status quo of a positional bargain creates
a “death spiral” effect because it does not foster the necessary elements for states to cooperate. For
cooperation to occur in the future, there must be a “shadow of future cooperation” prevalent enough
that states acknowledge it as a preferred method of strategy 28 . The articulation of Rouhani’s willingness
to cooperate casts this shadow, allowing for a more diplomatic, pragmatic, and amicable future for
P5+1 and Iranian relations to occur. It not only forges important international relationships but also
decreases the possibility of conflict as it allows for the outlets of constructive communication. This
prevents miscalculation in power, and negative interpretation of intents that could break the stability
and security of the international system.
The JCPOA changed the status quo in a manner that creates the immediate benefit of a
positive international environment. While the implementation over time may or may not cause
deterioration in relations, the fact that cooperation had occurred suggests that diplomatic solutions
are possible. Even when states view the stakes as extremely consequential and dangerous to their own
security and interests, a solution is still possible. While the implementation of the deal is yet to be
evaluated, the deal can still be viewed as successful. Overarchingly, the Iran deal changed a negative
status quo environment that perpetuates the security dilemma into a positive environment that
acknowledges relative gains in security for all parties and acknowledges the deeper consequences the
former environment has for the international system as a whole.
28 Kenneth A. Oye, ed. Cooperation Under Anarchy, Princeton University Press, 1986.
JPI Fall 2017, pg. 12