Negotiations Serve the Ayatollah’s Interests - Not America’s
For anyone following the drama of potential negotiations between the U.S. and Iran, it’s difficult not to experience a touch of deja vu. From last-minute venue changes to excluding regional representatives to demands to alter the scope of negotiations entirely, the Iranians are up to the same kinds of tricks that preceded the adoption of the disastrous Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) in 2015. And if all that wasn’t enough, Iran launched a drone at an American aircraft carrier and sent gunboats to try to intercept a U.S.-flagged oil tanker.
These are the same old tactics from the Islamic Republic – yet the context couldn’t be more different from a decade ago. Iran’s defeat in its seven-front proxy war with Israel has devastated its ability to project power, while Israel’s assaults on its military infrastructure and high command have revealed the Islamic Republic to be a paper tiger. The destruction of Iran’s nuclear program thanks to Operation Midnight Hammer dealt an enormous blow to the regime’s central survival strategy. And internally, the country is an absolute mess - with a worthless currency, economic catastrophe and a popular uprising that is only being tamped down by murdering thousands of civilians.
Take action with the ACLJ and add your name to the petition: Let President Trump Defend America.
In short, this regime – which has been the implacable enemy of the United States since the Islamic Revolution of 1979 – has never been weaker. So why are we the ones who seem so eager to make a deal?
It’s understandable why the Ayatollah would be looking for an overramp following President Trump’s threats of action if the regime started executing protestors, which it has been doing by the tens of thousands. Negotiations buy time and give them the opportunity to test the resolve of the United States in the hope that we’ll back down.
Even in their weakened state, they’re betting that since they’ve gotten away with gulling the West in the past, they will probably be able to do it again. And if a deal is struck, we know what comes next: The regime will lie and cheat their way out of any promises made and concentrate their energies on rebuilding their power base at home, and reconstituting their damaged military and nuclear infrastructure.
Throughout our history, the United States government has often had to make deals with governments we find abhorrent, yet whose cooperation is necessary to protect our interests. Part of being a competent statesman is determining when and whether these arrangements are truly in America’s interest and being able to distinguish a temporary partnership with an unsavory regime from appeasing an enemy of the United States.
The Islamic Republic has always made it exceedingly clear where it stands on the question of America: They want to destroy us. They’ve chanted it at Friday prayers for nearly 50 years and backed up those exhortations with the murder of American soldiers; by funding decades of global terrorism, and by partnering with other adversaries to undermine our interests wherever possible.
Proponents of negotiation might argue that this is a perfect opportunity to make a deal with Iran. No one wants war, but we’ve shown we’re willing to use force, when necessary, which gives us the upper hand. Fair enough. Yet the only outcome worth having from an American perspective - i.e. a result that would protect our interests - would be one in which the regime verifiably halts its nuclear program, destroys its ballistic missile program, and stops supporting global terrorism.
If you believe the Ayatollah and his minions will agree to that, I’ve got a bridge in Brooklyn to sell you. Taking actual, verifiable steps to dismantle the edifice of their power at the demand of the Great Satan would be a death sentence for this fanatical regime.
As a Christian, I pray for conversion; but as a realist, I have to acknowledge that there is no possible deal between the existing government of Iran and the United States that will do anything more than give a diplomatic lifeline to the regime.
President Trump withdrew from the JCPOA for a simple reason: It failed to guarantee the safety of the American people from the risk created by the leaders of the Islamic Republic of Iran. We backed that up with a maximum pressure campaign which brought an end to the appeasement of the Obama years, when billions of dollars were literally delivered to the Iranian regime to use as it saw fit – a windfall it promptly invested in expanding its power across the Middle East. We took an important step toward restoring deterrence by taking the decision to take out IRGC Quds Commander Qassem Soleimani. And when President Trump returned to power last year, he reversed the weak policies of the Biden Administration, upped the pressure on the regime, and joined Israel in its righteous mission to destroy the Ayatollah’s covert nuclear program.
That decisiveness has made it possible for President Trump to claim his place in history as the American leader who shepherded this troubled region toward peace. But without sustained pressure, that prospect could easily slip away. The President should trust his initial instincts to impose real consequences on this bloody dictatorship, and stand with the Iranian people.
When the Obama Administration was trying to strong-arm Congress into supporting the JCPOA, they liked to frame the issue as a binary choice between an imperfect deal or outright war. Today, a similar tactic is being used by those who are allergic to the exercise of American power or sympathetic to the aims of the Iranian regime. This isn’t to say that the disintegration of the Iranian regime doesn’t carry risks - it does. But we must recognize that the current situation is untenable, and that American interests and those of our allies in the Middle East and beyond will never be secured until the Islamic Republic is consigned to the dustbin of history.