This past Saturday — January 16, 2016 — was the most momentous day in U.S.-Iran relations since November 4, 1979. That was the date when a group of Iranian “students” seized the U.S. Embassy in Tehran and took its personnel hostages. The resulting Iran Hostage Crisis ended the era of the U.S.-Iran alliance that had existed under the Shah, and marked the start of a new cold cold.
On Saturday, the U.S. and Iran took actions that, President Obama hopes, will end that era of hostilities and open a brave new chapter in relations between the two countries. That was I-Day — implementation day for the nuclear accord reached last summer. The IAEA certified that Iran has complied with its obligations to freeze its nuclear program, even though Iran still has not come clean about its past nuclear work. And, in return, the U.S. began lifting economic sanctions on Iran.
That means Iran is now granted access to the SWIFT system for inter-bank transfers and, more importantly, to some $100 billion in frozen oil funds. The U.S. even agreed to pay $1.7 billion to Iran in a dispute over American weapons that were purchased and never delivered — a dispute that dates all the way back to 1981. By allowing Iran to increase oil exports, the new agreement could net Iran $30 million a day even at the current depressed state of oil prices.
Saturday was also the day when the U.S. and Iran completed a side deal: Iran agreed to free four American hostages held in Iranian captivity. In return, the U.S. freed seven Iranian agents convicted of helping Iran to evade sanctions on the sale of military technology and withdrew arrest warrants for 14 others. At the same time the U.S. imposed sanctions on 11 Iranian individuals or companies that have been involved in its illegal ballistic missile program — sanctions that had been delayed pending the prisoner swap.
President Obama expressed high hopes for what all this wheeling and dealing can accomplish. He told NPR: “They have a path to break through that isolation and they should seize it. Because if they do, there’s incredible talent and resources and sophistication inside of — inside of Iran, and it would be a very successful regional power that was also abiding by international norms and international rules, and that would be good for everybody. That would be good for the United States, that would be good for the region, and most of all, it would be good for the Iranian people.”
No doubt that would be a wonderful thing. If Iran actually makes the transformation that Obama envisions — from rogue state to law-abiding “regional power” — then all of the compromises he has made would have been worthwhile. But how likely is this?
Consider that even as this deal was being implemented, Iran’s Guardian Council was barring 99% of the reformist candidates for elections being held on February 26. “I predicted that the Guardian Council would massively disqualify the reformists,” said one reformer. “But the reality is even worse.” Keep in mind that even most of the “reformers,” like President Hassan Rouhani, are in favor of Iran’s nuclear program and attempts to export its revolution abroad, but they were still judged too threatening by the clerical establishment which, of course, retains the power to manipulate Iran’s faux-democracy as it sees fit.
Consider that even as the deal was being implemented Iran was stepping up its propaganda blitz over the brief seizure of U.S. sailors in the Persian Gulf. Not only did the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps release a humiliating view of the sailors on their knees (in probable violation of the Geneva Convention), but the IRGC’s deputy commander, Hossein Salami, also claimed that the sailors cried and that their arrest showed that Iran is the dominant military power in the region: “Since the end of the Second World War, no country has been able to arrest American military personnel,” Salami boasted.
Consider that even as the deal was being implemented, three more Americans, apparently working as military trainers, were kidnapped in Baghdad by a Shiite militia that undoubtedly has strong connections to Iran: According to this AP story, the three individuals were taken in broad daylight by gunmen wearing military uniforms and driving SUVs, and were then taken to the Shiite stronghold of Sadr City. This has all the hallmarks of previous kidnappings carried out by Iranian proxy group Asaib Ahl al-Haq (AAH). Whether or not the Iranian Quds Force approved of this operation in advance (and the likelihood was that it did), it beggars the imagination to think that American hostages could be held in Sadr City without Iranian approval.
Consider that even as the deal was being implemented, Bashar Assad’s forces were advancing in Syria thanks to the aid they receive from Iran and from Russian air strikes. Their bloodthirsty campaign includes either starving rebel-held areas (most notoriously Madaya) or barrel-bombing them. The death toll is already north of 250,000 and still climbing, and yet the Iranians are doing nothing to restrain Assad’s war crimes. Indeed, the Iranians and their Hezbollah proxies are helping to perpetrate these crimes.
And consider that even as the deal was being implemented, Iran was vowing to continue its (illegal) ballistic missile program. “Sanctions against [certain] people and companies will have no impact on the development of the industry, and we will actually demonstrate [their ineffectiveness] by displaying new missiles,” Iranian Defense Minister Brigadier General Hossein Dehqan said.
Granted, these are only data points. They are not proof that Iran under the current regime is incapable of reform. But they do very strongly suggest that very conclusion. Assuming that Iran does not reform, the deal that is now implemented will vastly enrich and empower a regime dedicated to “Death to America” and death, as well, to Israel. Iran’s bid for regional hegemony will be turbo-charged while its nuclear ambitions will, at best, be suspended for a decade. This only makes sense if Iran in the meantime becomes the kind of nicer gentler “regional power” that Obama imagines. Unfortunately for the president (and the rest of us), the mullahs who remain in control in Tehran have no intention of allowing that to occur. This suggests that January 16 will go down as a landmark event not in the history of successful diplomacy, as Secretary of State John Kerry imagines, but in the history of appeasement: a monument not to Realpolitik and rapprochement but to folly and delusion.
