The Increasing Tension Between the U.S. and Iran

Jun 24, 2019

1 min

Lowell Gustafson, PhD

Two oil tankers were attacked in the Gulf of Oman and an unmanned drone was shot down in the last two weeks, escalating tensions between the United States and Iran. After a last-minute bailout of a retaliatory airstrike, President Donald Trump announced additional sanctions against Iran on June 24.


Lowell Gustafson, PhD, a political science professor, taught American foreign policy and a course titled "Theories of War and Peace" for several years. He says with the talk of airstrikes and President Trump claiming there will be "obliteration like you've never seen before," Congress needs to step in. 


"Congress should immediately hold hearings and vote on exactly what conditions would need to be met before such an order was given. Before Congress makes an initial authorization to use force against Iran, the military should not follow any order to do so by the President. Our founders gave Congress the power to declare war since a single executive, whether monarch or president, should not have the authority to make such a weighty decision unilaterally."


Dr. Gustafson noted that so far, sanctions have proven counterproductive and a "unilateral presidential decision to use force undermines American constitutional democracy." He said the president's failure to think systematically about this issue leaves us moving from tactic to tactic.


Connect with:
Lowell Gustafson, PhD

Lowell Gustafson, PhD

Professor of Political Science | College of Liberal Arts and Sciences

Lowell Gustafson, PhD, is an expert in the politics, political structure and cultural heritage of Latin America.

Political ScienceInternational Political EconomyLatin American PoliticsInternational Relations TheoriesPolitics

You might also like...

Check out some other posts from Villanova University

3 min

Villanova Professor Releases Study on Gender Dynamics in the Beer-Drinking Community

Earlier this month, thousands of revelers donned dirndls and lederhosen to mark Oktoberfest, the annual celebration of Bavarian fare, oompah music and, above all else, beer. The fall festival is just one of many occasions, including happy hours, brewery tours and sporting events, where Americans enjoy the beverage. In fact, based on a recent report by the Pew Research Center, the U.S. population consumes approximately 6.6 billion gallons of beer each year, which averages out to about 26.5 gallons per adult of legal drinking age. However, while ales, lagers and stouts remain popular choices that bring people together, not everyone feels equally included. A new study by Shelly Rathee, PhD, the Diana and James Yacobucci '73 Assistant Professor of Marketing and Business Law, highlights a gender-based divide within the beer-drinking community, with female consumers often feeling overlooked and left out. "Due to the structure of the beer industry and marketplace, there is reason to believe that firms overproduce products that appeal to male audiences and overly communicate masculine aspects of beer consumption," says Dr. Rathee. "As a result, female consumers are made to feel (and may continue to feel) excluded by beer culture, on average. From a business standpoint, the beer industry may be limiting its total market potential in the process." As Dr. Rathee explains, the beer industry and marketplace are predominately populated by men, and academic literature has long indicated that male dominance in a social or business setting can alter the behaviors of women in myriad ways. In her project, "The Female Consumer Response Implications of Male Dominance in a Product’s Online Community," the professor sought to understand how this trend might manifest itself in an internet forum for beer aficionados, hobbyists and critics. By examining customer review data from the online community BeerAdvocate and conducting tests aimed at assessing gender-based differences in contributions, Dr. Rathee found that female consumers are inclined to defer to the male majority in such settings. In general, women either refrain from sharing their perspectives on products or adopt language characterized by what are commonly referred to as "masculinity themes." "Masculinity and femininity themes were drawn from the text of the online reviews and were identified using dictionaries derived from previous research on these topics," shares Dr. Rathee. "For example, if the consumer liked the taste of the beer, a more feminine way of describing this might be 'pleasant,' while a more masculine way might be 'strong.'" In these terms, the difference in expression might seem subtle. However, as Dr. Rathee contends, the prevalence of tens of thousands of reviews that lean toward a more masculine tone, with few offering a counterbalance, can have noticeable effects. A quick look at the beer aisle in your local supermarket reveals its impact, with bottles and cans featuring images of axe-wielding warriors, dinosaurs and gargoyles. "We found in our research that male dominance in a marketplace leads to lower trial intentions [plans to try or buy something] and brand attitudes among women," elaborates Dr. Rathee. "Therefore, we can argue that companies are likely to produce products, and marketing appeals, that are more targeted at male audiences." Although men are currently more than twice as likely as women to name beer as their preferred alcoholic beverage, Dr. Rathee suggests that there is potential to create opportunities that encourage more female drinkers to engage with beer culture. By fostering environments where women can express their preferences and perspectives, she believes the beer industry can become more inclusive and representative, ultimately enriching the community as a whole. "When featuring reviews on websites, an effort to balance out the presentation of ideas from male and female voices could be helpful," Dr. Rathee says. "Special categories could also be created to drive interest based on demographic characteristics that may include gender, among other factors. A more extreme measure would be to simply avoid including gender as a reviewer characteristic that is publicly viewable." Much like opening tents beside a beer hall, these steps could provide the necessary space and conditions for a more open and robust discussion of products to take place—to the benefit of both consumers and the industry. In the event they're increasingly pursued, that's something to which we can all raise a toast.

5 min

Villanova Professor at the Forefront of Work to Tackle Quantum Threats

Securing Our Future Against Quantum Threats Security and privacy are values that everyone cherishes. No tech user wants their personal information getting into the wrong hands, which is why we have security measures in place to protect our private data: face ID to unlock our phones, two-factor authentication to log into banking apps and fingerprint technology to securely enter any system—from a computer to your front door. Encryption codes are used on each of these platforms to encode private data and allow only authorized users to access it. These measures are put in place to protect us, but new advancements in technology could soon challenge these secure systems that we have come to know and trust. Quantum computers are extraordinary machines capable of solving problems far beyond the scope of today’s standard computers. Although these computers are not commercially available, scientists harness their power for experimentation and data storage. Quantum computers excel in scientific development, but they may also prove to be a threat to existing technology that we use in our daily lives. Experts predict that by 2035, quantum computers could crack the very encryption codes that secure everyday transactions and data. Jiafeng Xie, PhD, associate professor of Electrical and Computer Engineering at Villanova University, is at the forefront of this battle, using his Security and Cryptography Lab to strengthen security measures against the threat of quantum computers. The Rise of Post-Quantum Cryptography Since quantum computer advancements are accelerating at an unprecedented pace, post-quantum cryptography (PQC) has emerged as a critical area of research and development. Scientists who study PQC are working to come up with new algorithms to encode our sensitive data, with a goal of being installed after quantum computers crack our current encryption systems. Without these new algorithms, once quantum computers break our current codes, sensitive data—whether personal, corporate or governmental—could be left vulnerable to malicious actors. The core problem of our current encryption system lies in the foundation of public-key cryptosystems. Public-key cryptography is a method of encryption where the user logs into a system using their own private “key”, and the back end of the system has a “key” as well. A “key” is a large numerical value that scrambles data so that it appears random. When a user logs in, their “key” can decrypt private information held by the public “key” in the system to ensure a secure login. This security method is safe right now, but these systems rely on mathematical principles that, while secure against classical computing attacks, are vulnerable to the immense processing power of quantum computers. At the heart of the vulnerability is Shor's algorithm, developed by MIT computer scientist Peter Shor in 1994. As Dr. Xie explained, “Shor invented an algorithm to solve prime factors of an integer that can supposedly run on a quantum computer. This algorithm, if run on a large-scale mature quantum computer, can easily solve all these existing cryptosystems' mathematical formulation, which is a problem." The realization of this potential threat has spurred an increased focus on the development of post-quantum cryptography over the past decade. The goal is clear: "We want to have some sort of cryptosystem that is resistant to quantum computer attacks," says Dr. Xie. In 2016, the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) began the process of standardizing post-quantum cryptography. In July 2022, NIST selected four algorithms to continue on to the standardization process, where they are currently being tested for safety and security against quantum computers. The standardization process for these new algorithms is intensive, and two of the candidates that were announced for testing have already been broken during the process. Scientists are in a race against time to increase the diversity of their algorithms and come up with alternate options for standardization. The urgency of this shift to post-quantum cryptography is underscored by recent government action. The White House released a national security memo in 2022 stating that the U.S. government must transition to quantum-resistant algorithms by 2035. This directive emphasizes the critical nature of post-quantum cryptography in maintaining not just personal but national security. Villanova’s Security and Cryptography Lab Once a new algorithm is selected by NIST, it will need to be embedded into various platforms that need to be secured—this is where Dr. Xie’s Security and Cryptography Lab comes in. This lab is actively conducting research into how the newly selected algorithm can be implemented in the most effective and resourceful way. The lab team is working on developing techniques for this new algorithm so that it can be embedded into many different types of platforms, including credit cards and fingerprint technology. However, there are significant challenges in this process. As Dr. Xie explains, "Different platforms have different constraints. A chip-based credit card, for example, has limited space for embedding new encryption systems. If the implementation technique is too large, it simply won’t work.” Another arising issue from this research is security. During the application of this new algorithm, there's a risk of information or security leakage, so Dr. Xie is always on the lookout for developing security issues that could cause problems down the road. The Future of Post-Quantum Cryptography The implications of PQC are widespread and extend far beyond academic research. As Dr. Xie points out, "All existing cryptosystems, as long as they have some sort of function—for example, signing in or entering a password for login—all of these systems are vulnerable to quantum attacks." This vulnerability affects everything from banking systems to small-scale security measures like fingerprint door locks. The scope of this transition is massive, requiring updates to encrypted systems across all sectors of technology. His goal is to ensure that these new cryptographic systems are flexible enough to be applied to everything from small devices like credit cards and drones to large-scale infrastructure like data centers and military equipment. Although researchers are hard at work now, the future of post-quantum cryptography is not without uncertainties. Dr. Xie raises an important question: "When quantum computers become available, will the algorithms we develop today be broken?" While the newly developed algorithms will theoretically be secure, vulnerabilities can emerge when implementing any kind of new security system. These potential vulnerabilities highlight the importance of conducting this research now so that the new algorithms can go through intensive testing prior to being implemented. Despite these challenges, Dr. Xie emphasizes the importance of being prepared for this new reality. "Society as a whole needs to be prepared with this kind of knowledge,” he says. “A new era is coming. With our current security systems, we need to have revolutionized change. On the other hand, we should not be panicked. We just need continued support to do more related research in this field.” More extensive research is required to ensure that our privacy is protected as we enter a new era of quantum computing, but labs like the Security and Cryptography Lab at Villanova are a step in the right direction. Although the “years to quantum” clock is ticking down, researchers like Dr. Xie are well on their way to ensuring that our digital infrastructure remains secure in the face of evolving technological threats.

3 min

Amid Detainees' Release, Putin Flaunts Power and Flouts Western Influence

On August 1, the United States, Russia, Germany and three other European nations engaged in an historic 24-person East-West prisoner exchange. The largest such swap since the end of the Cold War, the multi-country deal secured the release of three prominent American detainees: Wall Street Journal correspondent Evan Gershkovich, corporate security executive Paul Whelan and Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty editor Alsu Kurmasheva. It also freed a dozen Russian opposition leaders, incarcerated in their native country for challenging Vladimir Putin and his authoritarian regime. Lynne Hartnett, PhD, is the chair of Villanova University’s Department of History and an expert on modern Russia, protest movements and dissidents in exile. Recently, she shared some insights on the Kremlin's decision to release the American and Russian prisoners—as well as the egotism, oppressive tendencies and political posturing that drove their detention. Q: The arrests and sentencings of Gershkovich, Whelan and Kurmasheva have been described as "outrageous," "a mockery of justice" and reflective of "a total disregard for basic freedoms." What prompted Putin and the Russian government to detain these individuals? Dr. Hartnett: For Putin, seizing Gershkovich, Whelan and Kurmasheva was a power play. They were pawns for him to use when he deemed it convenient. If they could be used in a prisoner swap, they would be. But if that time never arrived, their incarceration, suffering and even potential deaths were inconsequential to him. Their arrests were also a signal that, in Russia, Putin's authority is uncontested. These were American citizens, and around the world, a U.S. passport opens doors: It holds power; it provides access; and it affords its holder protection. But the arrests of Gershkovich, Whelan and Kurmasheva were Putin’s attempt to demonstrate the limits of American influence. They were meant as a signal that, in Russia, a U.S. passport becomes meaningless if it serves Putin to make it so. Q: In recent years, the Russian government has seemingly worked to rehabilitate the reputations of figures like Josef Stalin, who infamously used the Soviet Gulag to stifle opposition and criticism. Is Putin's use of detentions as a political cudgel similar? DH: The show trials of the Stalinist era are frequently referenced. However, it should be stressed that those were largely intended for domestic consumption. They were used to justify the Communist elites' repression of fellow citizens by broadcasting "evidence" that enemies lurked within. The trials of Americans like Gershkovich and Brittney Griner [a professional basketball player detained on smuggling charges] were designed to show the world, not just Russians, that Putin's regime would not be cowed—even if the person being tried had fame and a powerful enterprise, like the Wall Street Journal or the WNBA, supporting them. Q: The New York Times recently ran a piece on the Russian dissidents released, claiming "hopes are high [they] will breathe new life into a fragmented opposition force." What do you anticipate these political players' activism will look like in the coming years, especially in exile? DH: As in the Imperial and Soviet periods, Russian censorship prevents any news or opinions that are not the government's from coming to light. As Putin has dismantled political opposition in Russia and tightened his grip on any vestiges of civil society in the country, there is little hope that a powerful opposition movement can gain momentum without outside support. This is where the Russian dissidents living abroad come in. They will ensure that a vision for another type of Russia is articulated. At the end of the 19th and the beginning of the 20th centuries, political exiles smuggled illegal newspapers and journals into the Russian empire to instill hope in their compatriots, to give them some indication that a nation beyond the autocracy was achievable. This, in my opinion, is the role that Russian dissidents living in exile must have today. They must provide the vision. They must provide the hope. While they cannot change the system on their own—they need a movement en masse—the dissidents abroad are needed to demonstrate that a nation without Putin and his repressive regime is possible. This is certainly not an easy venture, and it will require extraordinary sacrifices to be made a reality. However, it may be the Russian people's only hope.

View all posts