Skip to main content
Politics

You are not logged in. Your edit will be placed in a queue until it is peer reviewed.

We welcome edits that make the post easier to understand and more valuable for readers. Because community members review edits, please try to make the post substantially better than how you found it, for example, by fixing grammar or adding additional resources and hyperlinks.

Required fields*

5
  • This question is similar to: Has Russia explained why Ukraine can trust them, given the Budapest memorandum?. If you believe it’s different, please edit the question, make it clear how it’s different and/or how the answers on that question are not helpful for your problem. Commented Apr 8 at 12:42
  • what diplomatic measures or mechanism can be made by Iran to ensure the US (and Israel) honours these terms this seems backwards. It's obvious that it is the US that wants something, regime change with a compliant supplicant. The problem is that the US does not have anyone, zero people to provide enforcement of terms in Iran. That apparently includes the 500,000 Iranians residing in the US. I haven't seen a single person. The current regime exists due to it did fight and forced regime change. Commented Apr 12 at 11:11
  • @GregAskew Iran is the weaker party here with limited options. And it doesn't trust the US. I am asking what terms can Iran insist on with the US to assure itself that the US would honour some important term in the agreement. (In other words, some kind of guarantees included in the agreement that would make the US think twice before breaking the term as it would end up being politically costly for it). Commented Apr 13 at 14:31
  • There aren't any, for the same reason. And if there were agreement on terms, there is no court or arbiter to resolve differences. Or mechanism to compel compliance. It is likely that there is little appetite for direct engagement on the ground by anyone. Otherwise the simplest and quickest resolution would be to establish crusader states on the shoreline and call them Exxon, Shell, and British Petroleum. Commented Apr 13 at 15:45
  • @GregAskew That isn't factual. As others have pointed, there are diplomatic options, like asking a third-party to be the guarantor. Commented Apr 13 at 17:02