Iran’s nuclear deal and us
Abdulrahman al-Rashed/Al Arabiya/ 16 July/15
The Iranian regime is like a monster that was tied to a tree and finally set loose based on good intentions. The agreement reached between major world powers and Tehran abandons the demand to end its nuclear program, and lifts sanctions as Iran restores more than $100 billion of frozen assets. I can imagine the wide smile of disbelief of Iranian leaders, as this is a gift from the sky for almost nothing in return.
The conditions Tehran set at the end were not a necessity, but it imposed them to further pressure the Americans and speed up the negotiating process by refusing the inspection of military sites and preventing investigations with Iranian scientists.
Washington accepted a deal that we all know could have been better
It was all a farce that began in Tehran in a moment of fear that the regime may collapse due to sanctions, bankruptcy and domestic pressure. Most Iranian civil aircraft are no longer fit for use due to lack of maintenance and spare parts. Everything in Tehran has become eroded.
An expert on Iran told me the government was ready for any deal with Washington at any cost, as what mattered was ending sanctions, especially after banning Iran from using the dollar in its transactions – the final nail in the coffin of a series of fatal sanctions. We can imagine the talk inside Tehran on how to convince the Americans that this a historical deal with conditions.
A better deal
U.S. President Barack Obama did not commit a mistake when he accepted the Iranian proposal, as the aim of sanctions was not to topple the regime but to force it to give up its nuclear military program and alter its hostile behavior. The Iranians were prepared for a real reconciliation, but Washington rushed and was afraid it would miss its chance to reach a deal, so it accepted a deal that we all know could have been better.
We are not against the agreement, lifting sanctions or Western reconciliation with Iran, as this serves our interests and proves to Iranians and Arabs that everything Tehran has said in the past 30 years contradicts its current endeavor to reconcile with the Great Satan. Most importantly for us, such reconciliation ends the regional tension that has been ongoing between us and Iran since the last century.
We have grown tired, and want an ending that benefits the Iranian and Arab peoples without humiliation or pain. Unfortunately, the deal fulfils Iranian clerics’ wishes as it allows Iran to keep its nuclear capabilities, and only imposes a 10-year hiatus on intensive uranium enrichment. Also, Tehran is free to resume its adventures and support extremist groups. The agreement does not include a mechanism or set of commitments to protect the region.
What we fear is the deal strengthening the hawks in Tehran and therefore postponing any positive transition within or outside the regime for a decade or two. The authority of evil governments, such as Saddam Hussein’s in Iraq, Bashar al-Assad’s in Syria and Moammar Qaddafi’s in Libya, has either fallen or weakened, and the Iranian regime was afraid it will face the same fate.
The agreement has fortified it, so we expect more wars and blood in the region. That is why we disagree with Washington as it could have signed a better deal that could have positively changed the region, as Iran is the official supporter of most extremist parties, from Hezbollah to Hamas to the League of the Righteous. Iran is the motive for the emergence of opposing extremist parties such as Al-Qaeda and the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS), and its terrorist operations have expanded to include the Philippines in the far east to Argentina in the far west.
For many Arabs, Iranian centrifuges are of the least concern
Joyce Karam/Al Arabiya/ 16 July/15
There is no question that the comprehensive agreement reached between Iran and the P5+1 countries on Tuesday is a step forward for the Non-proliferation regime and Iran’s relations with Europe and the United States after 36 years of isolation. The deal, however, coming at the lowest point for Iranian-Arab relations, is not exclusively viewed in the region for its arms control merits but for possibly financing Tehran’s armed network of proxies regionally.
In many Arab circles today, the immediate value of the agreement as a non-proliferation asset and a document that caps Iran’s nuclear program is overshadowed by Iran’s regional behavior across the Middle East. The reactions to the nuclear deal in the Arab world are not a zero sum game. On the one hand, the agreement was welcomed by UAE, Saudi Arabia and Turkey as a Non-proliferation necessity in a highly combustible Middle East. Nevertheless, concerns over Iran’s destabilizing activities from Yemen to Syria and Iraq were made to U.S. President Barack Obama in phone calls with the UAE and Saudi leaders. While the nuclear agreement lifting around $150 billion in sanctions could bring a much needed relief to the Iranian people, it is not guaranteed that it would weaken the hardliners. After all, it wouldn’t be uncommon in the Middle East if Iran’s elite chose to pursue economic openness at home while funding interventionist projects abroad.
Regional distrust
In many Arab circles today, the immediate value of the agreement as a non-proliferation asset and a document that caps Iran’s nuclear program is overshadowed by Iran’s regional behavior across the Middle East. Even in the final stages of the Vienna negotiations, Jordan reportedly thwarted a terror plot backed by Iran, while Hezbollah was going deeper into Zabadani battle in Syria, and IRGC’s Qassem Suleimani photo safari continued to Fallujah.
In that context, there is a sense of disillusionment by many in the Arab world in perceiving the deal as rewarding an expansionist Iran while turning a blind eye to its role in the bloodletting in Iraq and Syria. Lebanon’s outspoken leftist leader Walid Jumblatt referenced this sentiment while lambasting the agreement as a “result of the U.S. invasion and occupation of Iraq…signed with the blood of hundreds of thousands of Syrians.” Jumblatt’s comments irrespective of their political correctness, sum up the bigger crisis for Iran in the region today, and which goes far beyond its centrifuges. A Zogby poll conducted toward the end of 2014 showed that between 74 to 88 percent of Jordanians, Egyptians, Saudis and Emiratis have negative views of Iran. That is a statistical coup from the 70 to 80 percent favorable ratings for Iran in the Arab world in 2008. In a matter of seven years, the Syrian war and Iran’s staunch support for the Assad regime has sunk its credibility in the region.
Healing the rift
Following the deal, U.S. President Barack Obama laid out the “opportunity” that the deal represents for Tehran to move in a new direction. Obama said that the “path of violence and rigid ideology, a foreign policy based on threats to attack your neighbors or eradicate Israel” leads to a “dead end” while “a different path, one of tolerance and peaceful resolution of conflict, leads to more integration.”
Obama’s words and choices for Iran should be coupled with a regional strategy for his administration. The nuclear agreement creates a diplomatic space for the U.S. and Iran to initiate conversations on regional conflicts whose settlement is key to the long-term success of the deal itself. Sticking to a morally bankrupt and a lost cause in Syria with the name of Bashar al-Assad will only deepen Tehran’s regional crisis, and drain its resources while strengthening ISIS. Pursuing instability in places like Jordan, Bahrain and Lebanon will not help embracing Iran in the international community.
The nuclear deal provides a window of opportunity for Iran to reexamine its regional policies, and for the U.S. to pursue a larger strategy beyond capping centrifuges. Slipping further into the path of expansionism and militia building in the Middle East will only bring more antagonism toward Iran, and prolong the status quo of conflict in the entire region.
