We Must Learn from History & Not Repeat the Failed 2015 Iran Nuclear Deal

“To Iran, diplomacy is merely a kiss drawn with a sword”

By: Rebecca Theodore

Under a darkened sky in Washington, another US foreign policy crisis looms. This time, the fatality lies with the Joint Comprehensive Plan Of Action (JCPOA, commonly called the Iran Nuclear Deal. Entering into a similar JCPOA agreement would be counterproductive in terms of Middle East policy, U.S. interests, and global commerce, while straining the friendly relations among key European powers it seeks to serve.

Despite the fact that Iran’s aggression and antagonism knows no boundaries, many members of the news media and virtually the entire Democratic party in Washington are willfully ignorant, if not complicit, in Iran’s enhanced genocide and its provocation of proxy wars in the Middle East under the disguise of credible diplomacy.

Streams of images in nostalgic portrayal of the old Iran Nuclear Deal is like a siren call to U.S. diplomats to re-enter the waters of another disingenuous deal.

Joe Biden contends that there is “a credible path to diplomacy” with Iran alluding to restoring a new diplomatic deal with Iran, ignoring what history has taught us that when dealing with despots, appeasement fails miserably.

The Obama-Biden regime pursued the original Iran Nuclear deal despite persuasive opposition from a US congress and foreign policy professionals.

According to Obama, “the deal would be a boon for the United States, for our allies in the region and for world peace.” Mistakenly, this desperate attempt to reach a nuclear agreement with Tehran is now a shattered hope that functioned as a way of Iran funding terrorist networks, weapons trafficking and Iranian plots against US interests abroad.

Not only did Iran escalate their nuclear capabilities, but human rights were ignored and sanctions were lifted, thus allowing hundreds of billions of dollars to flow back to support Iran’s ballistic missile development and surrogate proxies in Iraq, Lebanon, Syria, and Yemen under the watchful eyes of Democrats.

Sanctions relief encouraged Tehran’s murderous clan to intensify its hostility against the Nuclear deal. It is here that Iran entered Syria’s civil war in support of Bashar Assad. It is here that Iran armed Houthi rebels in Yemen and funded Hezbollah terror in Lebanon and Europe. It is here that Iran violated United Nations ban on arms trafficking and ballistic missile activity and repeatedly called for the annihilation of Israel.

It is plain to see that if any credible diplomacy is to be attained by the United States, the of events that brought diplomacy to this gridlock cannot be ignored.

First, it must be remembered that sanctions instituted under the category of counterterrorism and human rights such as those against the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps are difficult to enforce, yet Democrats continue to support them.

Secondly, Iran’s use of proxies and clients in the Middle East stimulates instability and grants Iran a powerful force with regard to the internal dealings of its neighbors. Iran’s aggressiveness is not designed to end foreign intervention in Iraq, but to push America out so that Iran can enforce its policies in Iraqi politics from the perspective of Iran being a nuclear power.

Given these circumstances, is difficult for the United States to make and build consensus for an effective counter strategy as credible diplomacy in any Iran Nuclear deal. For one, Iran’s approach to deterrence continues to build threats to the main tenets of US foreign policy priorities of non-proliferation, arms control, and regional stability.

The report of the International Atomic Agency discloses that Iran’s uranium stockpiles have grown 800% since the US quit the deal and now has enough supply to create three bombs if it enriches the material to weapons grade. This means that Iran is a known culprit of breaking diplomatic agreements, security council mandates and international law. With this history of deception, who reasonable person could trust Iran to fulfil its end of any new agreement?

While it is true that the Trump administration withdrew from the Iran deal and conducted a maximum pressure campaign against Iran including sanctions, it was those sanctions that prevented funds from reaching organizations sponsoring attacks against the West. It would be a grave mistake to remove sanctions in barter for any diplomacy without evidence that Iran has ceased its sponsorship of Hezbollah and has credibly renounced terrorism.

History favors principled actions over short term pragmatism. Conversely, sanctions against Iran were effective because they created an economic enticement for Iran to come to the bargaining table. In no uncertain terms, Mr. Trump’s decisive actions of ‘unrecognizing the Iran Nuclear Deal’ through sanctions and a maximum pressure campaign should be lauded for paving the way for a more assertive attitude against a deadly regime in the Middle East.

To be sure, it is Israel that faces the existential threat of Iranian pronouncement in the grand scheme of diplomacy. Together with the recent killing of Iran top nuclear scientist Mohsen Fakhri Zadeh, offerings of death and violence further mirror the face of Iranian aggression against Israel and further complicate all pathways to credible diplomacy.

Furthermore, the question of annexation has not been eliminated from the table of negotiations. An Abraham Accord gives rise to a new changing Middle East that buries age old feuding with promises of bilateral agreements between Israel and her neighbors. The attempts of Democrats to put negotiations back on the table evokes Iran’s historic stubbornness to negotiate at the nuclear bargaining table.

Hereto, how can a former Obama administration partner who ignored Iran’s past bad behavior engage in similar diplomacy condoning Iran’s ongoing reign of terror succeed in securing a new, secure, constructive nuclear deal in the Middle East?

Regardless of Obama’s homily at the portico of Cairo to confront violent terrorism, Tehran’s fist remains clenched, America is Iran’s eternal enemy, and Americans lest not forget that Iranian diplomacy at this late stage of the game is nothing but a form of warfare.

It is sheer folly to return to a convoluted JCPOA and live in the illusion that things will magically change. To Iran, diplomacy is merely a kiss drawn with a sword.

Rebecca Theodore is an international journalist and syndicated op-ed columnist based in New York City. She writes on the platform of national security, politics and human rights.