Home | About | Donate

Narrative on Iran Defective at Its Core


#1

Narrative on Iran Defective at Its Core

Firoozeh Kashani-Sabet

President Trump’s withdrawal from the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) comes as the culmination of years of flawed conversations about Iran’s involvement in the Middle East. Yesterday, he stated that the deal was “defective at its core.” In reality, the actual core defect lies in the political narrative on Iran in the United States, which predictably has resulted in the failure of the nuclear deal.


#2

Let’s not forget that Iran has a longstanding culture based upon Persian history. The Anglo-American Enterprise, Inc. much prefers to deal with states without cohesion, even if they have to be ruled by tyrants, who are easily replaceable when necessary. Saudi Arabia has little history as it is based upon nomadic peoples of disparate tribes. Iran has not yielded to the divide-and-conquer technique, while ironically Saudi Arabia has been cobbled together from the divided. Oil is an intoxicant.


#3

Is there a case for Donald Trump to be the only person in the history of the Universe to get 2 Nobel Peace Prizes?

Donald Trump is ignorant, self-centered, and inept. While he is gifted at public relations and entertainment, his fundamental guiding principle is not right wing conservatism but thin skinned
narcissism.

He is, however, in the position of bringing about US government agreement for peace with North Korea. With unrepentant war criminal Kissenger and nice-guy war criminal Obama getting Nobel prizes, its clear that the Prize does not have much meaning. Perhaps the prospect of winning a Nobel Peace prize can be used to encourage narcissistic Donald Trump to agree to a peace treaty with North Korea.

As peace with North Korea is a possibility, Donald Trump, and his war-mongering cabinet, have put the US on the path to war with Iran. At this point, extreme efforts must be taken to prevent the mass slaughter that war with Iran would bring. Perhaps Trump’s ego can be stoked, even further, into working for peace with Iran by the prospect of being the only person of history to earn 2 Nobel peace prizes.

These are just some thoughts. I wish that the world was not is such a horrible state of affairs, but it is.


#4

can you be a patriot and advocate war with Iran?


#5

Two Nobel Peace Prizes would not only tickle the rib of Orwell but also of Voltaire, Swift, and Heller, among others. A bitterly humorous satire.

We’ll have to wait until June to discover what will really transpire between Trump and Kim, but what would a peace deal with North Korea entail? Presumably, it would include regulation of nuclear weapons development, a regimen of inspections, cutbacks, and certifications. So, something such as a Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action as was brokered with Iran? The difference would be that Trump–not Obama–would broker this deal and crow about it even if is identical to what Obama helped to broker.

Also, Israel and Saudi Arabia are itching to go to war with Iran, and they are willing to fight to the last American, which seems to suit John Bolton to a tee. So, either Trump doesn’t get it, or he doesn’t care. Or perhaps both.

I don’t agree that the Nobel Peace Prize “does not have much meaning.” I’m glad to see it go to organizations such as Medecins Sans Frontieres, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, and the rather timely International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons, among others. It seems to be a mixed bag, so I don’t see it as an infallible arbiter by any stretch, but sometimes you have to take the good when it appears.


#6

Why would N. Korea give up it’s weapons when Trump throws away an agreement that kept Iran from having nuclear weapons and now is being threatened with war by the Trump administration?
Peace prize, more like a war prize.
The trio of neocons, Israel, and Saudi Arabia has wanted Iran destroyed for decades. Throwing the agreement away means war can now be conducted against this ‘terrorist’ regime.
N. Korea will discover that Trump is not someone to make an agreement with. He has never honored any deals he has made with others. It is just a con job and N. Korea is foolish if they think Trump will get them what they want. And Trump is a fool who thinks he will get what he wants from them.


#7

This article leaves out a lot.

In World War II Iran was neutral under its then Shah, Reza Shah.

After Germany attacked the Soviet Union and the U.S.S.R. became an ally of Britain, the British needed to supply the U.S.S.R. and get oil there. Iran would have been perfect for this, both as a staging ground for supplies and as a source of oil. But Iran was neutral. Britain ordered them to not be neutral and they didn’t obey.

So on August 25th, 1941, the British invaded from Iraq and the Soviets from the north. They quickly conquered Iran, deposed Reza Shah, and put his son, Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, on the throne. (About ten years later the UK & the US overthrew the democratic government and made the same Pahlavi an absolute monarch instead of a constitutional one. He’s the same Shah that was deposed in 1979.) They occupied Iran until 1946.

Iran has good reason to mistrust the West.


#8

Here is more on the West.

The US withdrew from the treaty, will not honor their obligations under it but insist that Iran still must comply to its terms.


#9

You make good points; however, I think the differences between the 2015 Iran deal and a “presumable” Korean deal are more than you’ve recognized. First, Iran told the world that their nuclear program was for energy only and they had not completed the nuclear enrichment process. Whereas, North Korea has nuclear bombs capable of being launched thousands of miles. The Korean deal is supposed to be about denuclearizing (not regulating) the DPRK’s weapons program. Also, it is unlikely that sanctions on N. Korea will be relaxed anywhere close to a level of those on Iran. Furthermore, Amerca’s allies and N. Korea’s enemies in the region are very much on board with the upcoming “presumptive” deal, which was not the case on Iran in 2015 (I understand if this one is meaningless to you considering your contempt for Israeli and Saudi warmongering). Finally, if this Singapore summit leads to an actual peace treaty officially ending the Korean War, it would be a historic moment for world peace.
As far as your rebuttal to the “possible 2nd Nobel Prize” for tearing up the Iran deal, I fear your concise analysis is all too true.


#10

Thank you for the reply. You are right–the North Korean situation is not a direct parallel to Iran’s, and I agree that the negotiations will not mirror those that had been done with Iran, particularly, as you note, there is a little matter of a war on the Korean peninsula that has never been officially ended, with the attendant material threat faced by ally South Korea, for one.

This is just a gut feeling that I cannot support, but I don’t see North Korea completely denuclearizing and thus forfeiting their biggest (pardon the expression) trump card of international power. We’ll see what happens next month, but with observers such as Sung Yoon Lee skeptical about the Trump Administration’s ability to negotiate with North Korea, I have to wonder how much of this is “government by stunt” on Trump’s behalf to play to his base. The more ominous route is that this leads to a worsening of tensions. Or perhaps they won’t even agree on the shape of the table and will have to move to another round.


#11

Thank you for your insight. I admire your intelligence and logical realism.


#12

Aw, shucks, and sorry for the late reply.

And in the meantime, as Kim Jong-un has now threatened to pick up his marbles and go home . . .