Analysis Question #2

Issues dealing with nuclear power are very sensitive in today's world. In order to plan their negotiations the US needs to consider, their opponent's way of talking, language, and nonverbal communications. I think the most important thing when dealing with people of a different culture is respect. Obviously Iran does not want to be shown as a lesser nation. Consequently, you need to understand their customs and ways of thinking not only to avoid disrespecting them but in order to better get through to them. Not all people respond well to threats. Therefore, one must take into consideration a more conversational negotiation. While to those who may view that as a sign of weakness, you should then resort to threats or a more firm confrontation.

Language is always an issue when is comes to politics. When addressing a particular country, should you do it in their language? I don’t think that would be necessary but that is when translation and interpretations come into play. They should make sure that their speech is translated the way they want it to be. Otherwise it can mean a different thing than they want it to.

Nonverbal communication is as important as verbal communication. This may include silence, eye contact, as well as facial expressions. The way you address people is important because it can mean different things to different people and therefore may cause misunderstandings. You don’t want people to think your dangerous when you're really not. The textbook gives a good example of this in politics. During the Gulf War, the US secretary of state met with Iraqi officials and calmly told them they would attack them. The Iraqis took his calmness for fear and thought they wouldn’t do it. They were wrong. I believe that is the perfect example of misunderstanding nonverbal communication. And since Iraq and Iran have similar cultures they may have the same interpretations. As a result, they should be careful as to not give their opponents the wrong impression.