Like what you've read?

On Line Opinion is the only Australian site where you get all sides of the story. We don't
charge, but we need your support. HereÔŅĹs how you can help.

  • Advertise

    We have a monthly audience of 70,000 and advertising packages from $200 a month.

  • Volunteer

    We always need commissioning editors and sub-editors.

  • Contribute

    Got something to say? Submit an essay.

 The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
On Line Opinion logo ON LINE OPINION - Australia's e-journal of social and political debate


On Line Opinion is a not-for-profit publication and relies on the generosity of its sponsors, editors and contributors. If you would like to help, contact us.


RSS 2.0

Donít deal with Iran

By Slater Bakhtavar - posted Thursday, 26 August 2021

From the day of Joe Biden's inauguration in the United States, one of the new administration's major foreign policy objectives has been the restoration of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action with Iran. Like most ill-destined roads, the JCPOA was paved with good intentions. Commonly known as the "Iran nuclear deal," it placed strict restrictions on the Iranian government's enrichment of uranium for possible use in nuclear weapons, and used the threat of economic sanctions to induce compliance. To be sure, nobody wants a nuclear-armed Iran, especially under the despotic, theocratic regime that has ruled there since 1979.

The JCPOA was a foolish manoeuvre when it was enacted in 2015 and seeking to revive it is foolish now. To understand why, we must understand the two factors undermining it: (i) The ineffectiveness of the deal itself, and (ii) Iran's own reasons for wishing to avoid it despite the threat of sanctions.

But first, Iran's new president. Ebrahim Raisi is an ultra-conservative ally of the Iranian theocracy, which certainly helps to explain the widespread understanding in Iran that his election was rigged and neither of his opponents ever had any actual chance. He is a hardline supporter of Iran's Sharia law, an old-timer who, unlike the Iranian youth, views the West with seething distrust.


He is also a criminal. In 1988, he was one of four Iranian judges pronouncing summary death sentences without due process on political opposition that were being held in prison for various failures of orthodoxy. He has defended that massacre because it was commanded by the Ayatollah, just as he has defended other politically-motivated murders by the regime since. This is the man whom the US must face in any negotiations for reinstating the nuclear deal.

Truthfully, however, the futility of such reinstatement does not require attacking Raisi's character – easy though the job may be. Iran has no interest in reviving the JCPOA. Their only possible motivation for doing so would be to stop U.S. sanctions against them, and there is simply no reason to believe that this is a pressing concern for the regime.

Economic sanctions are of limited utility against dictatorial governments, because the people in power, and their pampered lackeys, are wealthy and do not personally suffer the fallout. Those consequences are felt by the common people, the population of Iran in this case, who are driven into poverty by the millions when international trade stops. In fact, having the nation's treasure targeted by a direct attack from outside helps legitimize the authoritarians in charge. Hardline calls for ever more extreme and repressive police state policies, all in the name of "national security," can be justified by actual, provable foreign attacks against the economy of the homeland.

We must also ask whether the deal, if only it could be brought back, would be effective in restraining the Iranian regime's hands from developing nuclear weapons. Again, the outlook is far from encouraging.

This, ultimately, is because President Trump had the misfortune of inheriting a fine mess when he was asked to steward the Obama-era JCPOA. His clean-up measure was to cut our losses and withdraw from the agreement. It was the best option available to him, but it carried the unfortunate side effect of showing Iran just how fickle the deal was on the American side. It was never a treaty – nor does it stand any realistic chance of becoming one in the current political climate in the US. Rather, it was instituted essentially at the whim of a sitting president, and could be waved away just as easily by another, or even, the same president. Iran's religious government, no doubt, having concluded that they were deceived by what they regard as a godless, evil adversary would not be quick to enter into such a bargain again. More importantly, even if they did, they would have no reason to respect it by holding up their end of the deal.

Diplomacy with the Iranian theocratic regime is no solution. At the same time, the very thought of Ayatollah Khameini, or any deranged zealot, having his finger on a nuclear "button" is terrifying. Fortunately, there is potential for salvation from the oppressed people of Iran. They are a mostly young, progressive population who are in no way represented by their brutal, repressive government. Iranians typically admire Western ideals of democracy and personal liberty, and would like to bring these principles home to Iran. They are the single greatest threat to the theocracy's continued power, which is why their demonstrations and protests have been cracked down upon so savagely in recent years.


For reasons already discussed, there is little the US can responsibly do to topple the Iranian regime. The imperative is for the American government to engage with the restless people of Iran, and support them in making their own decision to choose freedom. This can be done by supporting their access to technology, especially communications technologies that have radically empowered Iranians to connect with their like-minded countrymen. The people of Iran must be reminded, loudly and often, that the United States is behind them when they strive to move towards freedom.

It is unfortunate, but negotiations with their cruel regime will not help those people, and in fact could easily make their situation worse (as economic sanctions already have.) The JCPOA was a bad idea when it was first enacted, and it remains so today. Efforts to revive it are wrong-headed, and for the innocent population of Iran, potentially dangerous.

  1. Pages:
  2. Page 1
  3. All

Discuss in our Forums

See what other readers are saying about this article!

Click here to read & post comments.

7 posts so far.

Share this:
reddit this reddit thisbookmark with Del.icio.usdigg thisseed newsvineSeed NewsvineStumbleUpon StumbleUponsubmit to propellerkwoff it

About the Author

Slater Bakhtavar is a published journalist, policy analyst, practicing attorney and author of Iran: The Green Movement. His interest in politics has enabled him to contribute his knowledge to several journals, magazines, and nationally syndicated talk shows. Slater has earned a Bachelorís Degree in Political Science from Kennesaw State University, a Juris Doctorate Degree from South Texas College of Law, and a LL.M in International Law from Loyola Law School. In addition, Slater Bakhtavar received a certificate in alternative dispute resolution from the University of Georgia Law Center. To add to this list, Slater has decided to pursue a Masterís of Business Administration Degree from West Texas A&M. Currently, Slater resides in Dallas, Texas where he is engaged in the practice of law at his own law office. Outside of his law practice, Slater can be found devoting his time to The Republican Youth of America organization, where he sits as the founding President.

Other articles by this Author

All articles by Slater Bakhtavar

Creative Commons LicenseThis work is licensed under a Creative Commons License.

Photo of Slater Bakhtavar
Article Tools
Comment 7 comments
Print Printable version
Subscribe Subscribe
Email Email a friend

About Us Search Discuss Feedback Legals Privacy