Sl

445 views

Published on

4 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Well, it seems your classmates said it all. Congrats! It is a very good presentation. However, I would advise you to use less text in the slide. Also, try not to justify the texts into the slides for it leaves wholes in the slides, which is quite distracting. On the whole, however, your presentation is outstanding!
       Reply 
    Are you sure you want to  Yes  No
    Your message goes here
  • Fernanda's presentation is simply perfect! She showed an important ability to correlate concepts of International Relations with the theme. This enables and help us to understand the Iran's case, but also the NPT as a whole, trought others perspective. However she explains in a briliant way what is addressed in the text.
    It is clear that Fernanda concerned in dealing with every possible topic of this theme. She starts her presentation with theoritical explanations and then adressing the specific issue of Iran-Brazil-Turkey treaty and how it fits in these theories.
    A great presentation!
       Reply 
    Are you sure you want to  Yes  No
    Your message goes here
  • Fernanda, like I said in my comment on Romulo's presentation, your and his presentations are the best ones for me. What I most liked on his was the fact that he used images to illustrate it and beacuse of that, I didn't get bored. Long presentations without images are usually boring and that was why I liked yours. You succeded on making a long presentation without making it boring. Moreover, it's very interesting. You got how to relate the text with international relation concepts that we've learned and also used a concept map, I don't think I would be able to do it. Another thing I thought was very meritorious in your presentation is how it shows too much knowledge about the subject, it makes the reader believe in what you say and be involved with the text. I really really appreciated your work, congrats!
       Reply 
    Are you sure you want to  Yes  No
    Your message goes here
  • Hi Fernanda!
    Firstly, I would like to say I really appreciated your kind comment on my presentation. You can be sure that I turned out really happy when noticed someone watched my presentation and payed careful attention to it.
    Your criticisms were absolutely constructive and relevants. I made this primary mistake of considering Iran a non signatory of the NPT solely based on my misconceptions, something unforgivable in a presentation that pretends to analyze a global issue in a systematic way. And I completely understand how images are useful to illustrate ideas, and also to enrich a power point presentation. Mine really needs that, specially after the fact that I used a lot of effects on my presentation that desapeared all of a sudden when I uploaded it. LOL But I will, as soon as possible, update my presentation, taking your suggestions into account and fixing that horrible mistake I made. Then again, thank you for your assistance.
    Moreover, I'd like to comment on your presentation, which absolutely succeded in linking the text's key concepts with the agreement between Iran, Turkey and Brazil. You managed to build your presentation in a very clear way, making it understandable for those who haven't read the text or don't have a comprehensive knowledge on the subject. Also, your presentation does not contain neither an overstatement of details nor the lack of informations that are commonly found in power points presentations. You used the right amount of informations, something that made your presentation quite dynamic and interesting, involving the watcher with the subject discussed. I liked how you made a brief explanation about the agreement and the way you tried to demonstrate that this agreement shows Iran's true intentions, what, like you said, are less connected with will to develop nuclear bombs than with showing dissatisfaction with the current pay-off structure. Ah, I really liked the small concept map in the last slide.
    Congratulations Fernanda, your presentation is absolutely wonderful!
       Reply 
    Are you sure you want to  Yes  No
    Your message goes here
  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
445
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
2
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
4
Comments
4
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Sl

  1. 1. The Concept of Trust in International Relations And how the Iran-Brazil-Turkey Agreement enhances Reliability on the Non Proliferation Treaty and on the International System Fernanda Araripe de Paula Xavier
  2. 2. The Concept of Trust <ul><li>The acceptance of vulnerability to harm that others could inflict, but which we judge that they will not inflict. (Annette Baier) </li></ul><ul><li>A trusting relationship is one into which actors enter knowing that as a consequence they increase their vulnerability to other actors whose behaviour they do not control, with potentially negative consequences for themselves. </li></ul>
  3. 3. Two Main Approaches <ul><li>Rationalist : “I trust you because I think it is in your interest to take my interests in the relevant matter seriously”. This kind of approach is vulnerable to changes in the pay-off structure; in other words, it may stop being interesting to me taking your interest in consideration. </li></ul><ul><li>Binding : rests on the notion that actors will honour their promisses. I is expected that the other party or parties will do what is required to begin and maintain the relationship, because they valeu both its existence and its continuation. </li></ul>
  4. 4. Trust and International Relations <ul><li>There are two main ways of understanding the mechanism of the International System: </li></ul><ul><li>Realistic approach : the international system is anarchical and there is a lasting condition of pervasise uncertainty about the behaviour of others. Therefore, States are always prepared for the worst. This makes the establishment of trusting relationships impossible. There is no such thing as ‘good-faith’. </li></ul>
  5. 5. Trust and International Relations <ul><li>Idealistic approach : countries can cooperate rather than struggle in the International system. Stated depend on each other, so they have to establish healthy relationships. </li></ul><ul><li>Trust can be seen as an important tool if it is assumed that fear is not the only thing States are based on when acting in the International scenario. </li></ul>
  6. 6. Trust and the Non Proliferation Treaty <ul><li>Many agreements are based on the concept of trust. One of the most significant examples is the Non Proliferation Treaty (NPT). </li></ul><ul><li>In this case, the presence of trust is especially pronounced in the part of the original bargain which precludes the vast majority of signatories from the possibility of acquiring nuclear weapons. Therefore, their capability of achieving national security by military means is limited. In part, they have to trust nuclear weapons states (states ‘allowed’ to have a nuclear arsenal) won’t attack them. </li></ul>
  7. 7. Trust and the Non Proliferation Treaty <ul><li>Why is it interesting to keep that structure? </li></ul><ul><li>By assuring that only five countries posess nuclear weapons (USA, United Kingdom, France, Russia and China) there isn’t nuclear proliferation. Also, this five countries can focus on dismantling their nuclear arsenal, other prerrogative of the NPT. The world can walk towards a safer future. </li></ul>
  8. 8. Trust and the Non Proliferation Treaty <ul><li>Pay-off structure: most signatories accept never possessing nuclear weapons whereas the others commit to gradually dismantling their nuclear arsenal. </li></ul><ul><li>Result: a nuclear-free world. </li></ul>
  9. 9. Trust and the Non Proliferation Treaty <ul><li>However... </li></ul><ul><li>Non nuclear weapons states feel that the nuclear wepons states are not fulfilling their obligations towards the NPT, namely, their efforts to put an end to their nuclear weapons is paltry, what is partially true. </li></ul><ul><li>Non signatories feel they have the right to develop nuclear weapons. </li></ul><ul><li>How to deal with this? </li></ul>
  10. 10. Trust and the Non Proliferation Treaty <ul><li>Enhancing trust: reaffirming the original bargain. Nuclear weapon states fulfill their obligations so non nuclear weapon states can renew their trust on them and in the treaty. </li></ul><ul><li>Making parallel treaties with non signatories states aiming non proliferation. </li></ul><ul><li>Exchange of reliable information, greater acceptance of independence and confidence in other living up to mutual agreements. </li></ul><ul><li>Iran-Brazil-Turkey Agreement. </li></ul>
  11. 11. Iran-Brazil-Turkey Agreement <ul><li>Historic: </li></ul><ul><li>Iran a signatory of the NPT. Status: non nuclear weapons state. </li></ul><ul><li>Lately, the country has been refusing some of the NPT’s prerrogatives, such as non nuclear weapons states allowing inspectors to verify whether their nuclear facilities are being used to peaceful purposes. </li></ul>
  12. 12. Iran-Brazil-Turkey Agreement <ul><li>Tehran agrees to swap in Turkey most of its 3.5%-enriched uranium for 20%-enriched fuel for use in its Tehran scientific research reactor. </li></ul><ul><li>Some 1,200 kilograms of Iran's low-enriched uranium will be swapped. </li></ul><ul><li>This agreement is a way to strengthen international reliability in Iran. By committing to it, Iran shows that it is not interested in developing nuclear weapons. </li></ul>
  13. 13. Iran-Brazil-Turkey Agreement <ul><li>Controversy: </li></ul><ul><li>Hillary Clinton: predicts the Brazilian-Turkish mediation effort will fail. If Iran does not live up to its obligations towards the NPT, it cannot be trusted. </li></ul><ul><li>Answer: sanction it! </li></ul><ul><li>Exclude Iran from the International scenario </li></ul>
  14. 14. Iran-Brazil-Turkey Agreement <ul><li>By sanctioning Iran it is being desconsidered its commitment to the NPT. As a signatorie, he accepted not developing nuclear energy for military purposes. </li></ul><ul><li>Iran argues that nuclear wepons states refuse to dismantle their nuclear arsenal. So if they are not fulfilling their obligations, why should Iran fulfill with its? </li></ul><ul><li>It doesn’t mean Iran wants to develop nuclear bombs. Just that it is no satisfied with the current pay-off structure. </li></ul>
  15. 15. Iran-Brazil-Turkey Agreement <ul><li>The agreement proves that Iran’s intentions are trustworthy. </li></ul><ul><li>Signatories have to enhance NPT’s original bargain so that Iran feels attracted by it again. </li></ul><ul><li>The Iran-Brazil-Turkey Agreement is a key element in trustbuilding with Iran. Brazil and Turkey, both signatories to the NPT, believe it is a way to prove Iran’s peaceful intentions. </li></ul><ul><li>Instead of sanctioning Iran and establishing na offensive posture towards it, nuclear weapons states should fulfill with their obligations towards the NPT in order to renew its original trust relationship. </li></ul>
  16. 16. Iran-Brazil-Turkey Agreement <ul><li>The Iran-Brazil-Turkey Agreement contradicts the position of the nuclear weapons states, but it should not be seen as an offense. It just shows that in order to get Iran “to come bak to our team” it must be shown that we trust it, not that we doubt its intentions. It must be proved that “our team” trusts its players. </li></ul>
  17. 17. How It All Comes Together <ul><li>As you enchance trust in the Non Proliferation Treaty (by the Iran-Brazil-Turkey Agreement), you are strengthening the very basis of the international system. </li></ul>

×