Communication Strategies

The former president of United States of America, President Bush is mostly identified with the Iraq war and many people from America and across the globe are angered with the situation there. His poor handling of the conflict between the two countries has been criticized from time to time and because of that the US is still grappling with the consequences. Many have agreed that if the conflict had been resolved well, may be through other means, the war would have been averted and US would not be budgeting for the war the way they are doing now. Since then, two major conflicts have emerged and these are the conflict over the health bill by two dominant American parties and the other one is between USA and Iran over the latters nuclear program. This essay seeks to find out how these conflicts have been resolved and if not, what strategies have to be followed to resolve them.

The Conflict over the Health Care Bill
This conflict was between two major parties in the US, the Democrats and the Republicans. One would question what was in the bill. The passing of the bill meant that, with pre-existing conditions, parents would be able to buy their children and themselves insurance cover. The bill would also extend insurance on medical grounds to 32 million for the uninsured Americans which will last for ten years and this would be achieved by requiring every individual to purchase it through private exchanges. Another thing that the bill proposed is that companies offering insurances will not be restricted in raising prices and opponents have argued that many people will continue to be bankrupt because of their inability to pay huge medical bills hence not changing anything in America.

The most contentious issues were about abortion and Medicare rates. Many republicans and some anti abortion democrats saw the passing of the bill as a yes to abortion because it proposed that federal money would be used to provide abortions insurance coverage. Concerning the Medicare, people disagreed on the issue of geographical disparities which characterized the payments of Medicare.

The republicans saw the bill as an ambitious one and a strategy of the Obama government to take over the system of private healthcare and impose it on employers leading to a raise of taxes. At the time when the Americans economy is still reeling from recent economic slump, the republicans argued that they could not afford the budget which would cost 1.05 trillions in the next 10 years. They continued to argue that the consequences of this bill would be costly even to the next generations and it will take away the rights of Americans to make choices when it comes to health care. The nations jobs would also be devastated by this bill due to high costs of Medicare .

How was the conflict handled
The first step that was taken to resolve the issue is that the party leaders agreed to vote for an amendment to be done on the bill concerning abortion which was introduced by democrats who were antiabortion This amendment was approved and the approval meant that people who got subsidies on insurance would be prevented from buying private plans which covered abortions. Many were content with this move and they agreed to pass the bill.

Regarding the Medicare payments, the issue was left for the senate after the conservatives and moderates opposed the bill regarding the issue and even some democrats from rich states opposed the move to tax heavily the high earners in the country. The senate was left to decide whether companies should be given the opt out option that is, to choose to pay for their workers insurance coverage or face some punitive measures as suggested by the senate moderates. It was also mandated with the task to decide whether to tax the wealthy or health care policies which were highcost.

This led to another problem the house democrats could not trust the senate democrats over the bill. They saw that the latter would not do anything on the bill and they would just take it to the president the way it was prior to being taken there.

Strategies to Be Followed On the Conflict Resolution
What could have happened to solve all these divisions in the house and also in the senate, is for the house to pass the health care bill and take it to the president for signing. Then this would have been followed by a process of reconciliation which would need 51 votes of the senate to pass the amendments to the bill that would have been agreed upon by negotiators from the house and the senate.

It also would have been possible for the reconciliation bill containing amendments to be sent to the senate which would do some slight changes agreed by the house. Then the bill would later require the houses votes. Only after this would the house have passed the health care bill and then take it to the president for signing. This did not happen and that is why, Nancy Pelosi, the house speaker has been under criticisms for allowing the senate bill to pass without amendments. If she would have done so, there would not have been the wrangles that characterized the bill.

USA and Iran Conflict over the Latters Nuclear Program
This Conflict started when the United Nations reported that, it is under suspicion that Iran is in the process of developing nuclear weapons for war. This is as a result of some findings done by the UN nuclear watch dog but Iran has always found itself in the defense saying that its program is a peaceful one.
 
The (IAEA) International Atomic Energy Agency produced a report which contradicted the US report by saying that Iran had actually stopped its nuclear program. The US report agrees with Europes and Israels that Iran is enriching itself with Uranium which could make a nuclear bomb. This raised concerns over Irans past and present activities relating to nuclear development. The Obamas administration called the report a disturbing one. The US is calling for sanctions on Iran and also action to be taken against the country by the UN Security Council.

At the wake of these calls, Iran has tried to defend its nuclear program by saying that it is using Uranium to enrich its Tehran research reactor which helps in cancer treatment by producing Nuclear isotopes to be used medically. The IAEAs recent report on the issue, says that Iran is capable of developing nuclear warhead within 6 months. There so many unknowns in the Iran nuclear program with the US and Iran openly disagreeing over the issue.

How has the issue been handled before
The UN Security Council gave Iran a deadline through resolution 1737 to bring to a halt its nuclear program but Iran did not comply. This led to tension around the Persian Gulf when threats were leveled to Iran by the then US president, President Bush over its meddling in the Iraq war. During Presidents Bush leadership, the democrats had considered a grand bargain with Iran where the latter would continue with its nuclear program but cease to use the kind of fuel they are using which is usually used to produce nuclear bombs.

John Kerry, who was once a presidential candidate in the US came up with a new strategy of using Iran  in promoting stability in Iraq and Afghanistan. Thus, in his report, he was thinking of how to include Iran in the US efforts in creating post war governments in these countries. This would bring the two countries together. It was seen as unrealistic and a goal that could not be achieved.

In their effort to solve the situation, the west struck a deal with Iran in the year 2009. The latter agreed that it would transfer the uranium it had, even though low enriched to two countries, Russia and France in return for Isotopes for Tehrans research project. The president of Iran, Mahmoud Ahmdinejab was quite at home with the settlement but the Iranians could not hear of it. They rejected this forcing their president to counsel the deal.

The conflict between US and Iran has been long standing and some European states have offered themselves as intermediaries in their efforts to solve the stand off amicably. Washington welcomed this move but never participated actively but this changed later after President Bush visited Europe. In 2006, US for the first time offered to talk to Iran directly on high diplomatic level thus deviating from its principles of policies which they held since 1979. The US offered Iran both political and economic corporations but the latter rejected it resulting into diplomacy fail and calls for sanctions to begin. Even though European Union is always against the policy of isolation, the US has insisted that it is the best option. However, just recently, US approached Iran regarding Afghanistan and Iraq but the two countries have proven to be incompatible.

What Is the Way Forward In Solving the Conflict
The first step the US government should do is to make it clear that Iran will not be allowed to continue with its nuclear program because it is unacceptable. It should also be told to its face that even if they succeed to get them, they must give them up. Many have proposed the military option but this one will not help in solving anything and for a matter of fact, it is going to worsen the situation.

So what is the way forward First it should be acknowledged that negotiations will not lead to anything even though it is recommended. The US government should pay attention to various strategies that would increase pressure on Iran. It should impose sanctions on Iran, bolster its missile defense and also aim at establishing good relationship and Alliances with the Arab world around Middle East. Moreover, is it high time it learns to provide security assurances, and at the same time come up with structures that may reduce risks of nuclear weapon capabilities spreading in the Middle East. One thing is clear if Iran succeeds to get these nuclear weapons, nothing will prevent Egypt and Saudi Arabia to produce them.US should strive to dissuade these countries from engaging in the program, but the most important thing is for US to come up with mechanisms that will prevent these countries completely from accessing the nuclear capabilities.

US should never give up on this fight and accepting Irans nuclear weapons should be out of question. It is not always a win-win situation and therefore, it should never compromise but the answer should always be NO to Irans nuclear program. As stated before, declaring war on the country will be detrimental to US and thus the situation should be handled through containment, deterrence, robust alliances and at the same time trying weakening Iran. Russians and Chinese have been wavering in their decisions of whether to support Iran or US in imposing sanctions to the country. Russia recently has made it clear that it is not happy with the situation in Iran but Chinese are not yet to declare their stand on the issue. Since China is somehow close to Iran, US should aim at weakening that linkage between the two countries. The latter should encourage other Arab states to step up their crude oil supply to China to reduce the latters dependency on Iran for oil. It is going to be easy but the issue of using Diplomatic negotiations should be ruled out because it has proven to be ineffective with Iran.

In conclusion, there is bound to be conflicts all the time but the most important thing is how to resolve them. The resolutions should always aim at settling the conflict amicably where parties involved end up satisfied but the moment it is not done well, the conflict may persist and even be made worse.