Document Type : Academicm and Research
Author
Faculty Member of the Institution for Research and Development in the Humanities (SAMT)
Abstract
The Comprehensive Joint Plan of Action was concluded by Iran and the so-called 5+1 states in July 2015 and a few days later it was endorsed by the United Nations Security Council through Resolution 2231. Since then, debates have raged about the legal nature of this agreement. Some maintained that the JCPOA was a treaty in the sense of the 1969 Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, and on the other hand, the majority believed that it was non-binding. One of the reasons that confirm the JCPOA's non-binding nature is the nature of the agreement and its belonging to the cluster of bilateral or multilateral agreements in the field of disarmament in international law. In fact, this question is raised; what will be the effect of the nature of the agreement in question on the overall approach of the parties? So far, the JCPOA has been dealt with less from this perspective. In this article, while examining this feature in the light of the nature of the relevant agreements, we will compare the JCPOA with the process of denuclearization of North Korea and Iraq, which seem to be the most similar to the JCPOA in terms of history and nature, and are considered to be the empirical basis for the conclusion of the JCPOA. .
Keywords
Main Subjects
)
Send comment about this article