The Foreign Affairs article, reprinted below,
- praises Iran's public for electing "moderates" to its governing bodies;
- notes that the election goes a long way toward insuring the likelihood of success for President Obama's (and former Secretary of State Hilary Clinton's) Iranian Nuclear Deal, which congressional Republicans continue to try to frustrate;
- notes that the European Union is lifting sanctions on Iran at a faster pace than the United States is, for reasons unspecified -- and the article notes the eagerness with which European businesses (and indeed businesses from China to Basil) are doing striving for business with Iran;
- argues that the United States, alone of all nations, must retain the ability to impose biting sanctions on Iran;
- worries that the unequal lifting of sanctions may harm the United States' ability to impose biting sanctions on Iran;
- and gives these reasons for maintaining a hard position toward Iran:
[A]s Iran’s recent activities have shown, it is still a state supporter of terrorism, routinely abuses the human rights of its citizens, and is actively seeking to destabilize the Middle East. Aggressive enforcement of a robust sanctions regime will continue to allow the United States to pressure the country to abandon such activities.Take the three points that make Iran different from countries that hold values different from the West's, in order presented:
1. State Supporter of Terror There is no internationally agreed definition of a terrorist; "terrorism" is in the eye of the beholder.
From the point of view of many Syrians, Salafi Jihadists funded by rich Saudi and the United Arab Emirates are terrorists. From the point of view of Iranians, the United States is a terrorist state because it engineered the overthrow, by force, of a democratically elected president of Iran and installed an oppressive dictator in his place. Many Chileans and Argentinos would agree with Iranians on this, having suffered similar disruptions at the hands of the CIA.
Pakistan and India both got atomic bombs in violation of international protocols and neither is possible to be a rogue nation as Iran is.
The preference for one out of multiple standers on which to judge a nation's behavior, picking the one uniquely designed to continue Iran's isolation, is not explained by the authors. The preference is, however, a standard neoconic preference that appears frequently in neoconic writing.
2. Routine Abuse of its Citizens. The authors would do well to review Foreign Affairs, Time to get Tough on Saudi Arabia, which details the kingdoms historic and present human rights abuses on its own coins The us does not escape unblemished: many Iraqi condem the IranWar and the us treatment of prisoners in its prisons in Iranians in Afghanistan. Many United States citizens deplore that the United States has more prisoners than any other nation.
Iran is deprives citizens who dress in way its authorities think gay men might dress, of life. Saudi Arabia whips them before and after it hangs hem. The United States them them both beat on gay and women's rights issues.
3. Actively Seeks to Destabilize the Middle East. The authors again resort to double standards.
Saudi Arabia seeks to replace the elected, multi-ethnic government of Syria, brutal beyond belief, with a brutal Wahhabist one. That the Saudi desire to have their own form of religion rule all of Syria is one of the main reasons no settlement of the conflict has been possible.
Are Iranians really worse for the United States than the Saudi? Can we justify Saudi Arabia's genocide in Yemen? If we punish one, shouldn't we punish both? Shouldt we do our best to befriend the good in each?
And why are neocons so hard on Iran while turning a blind eye to failings in "friends?" The United States has been punishing Iran for 7 decades because it had the the temerity to nationalize oil.
Time now to call a halt; take a hint from the European Union; relax sanctions; let Pakistan have as much natural gas from Ian's Pars Field as it wants; continue the move to join the community of nations.
SNAPSHOT March 1, 2016 IranSanctions