For decades, successive U.S. administrations have attempted to tame the Islamic Republic of Iran’s nuclear ambitions through diplomacy. While the intent may be noble—avoiding conflict and halting nuclear proliferation—the reality is that engaging with Tehran’s regime, especially through renewed nuclear negotiations, is not only strategically naive but dangerously counterproductive. The very nature of the Iranian regime, its historical and ongoing acts of terrorism, and its openly hostile posture toward the United States render any deal a trap with far-reaching consequences.
A Regime Built on Hostility Toward America
The Islamic Republic has never disguised its animosity toward the United States. Since its inception in 1979, its foundational legitimacy has been wrapped in slogans like “Death to America.” It held 52 American diplomats hostage for 444 days—an act of war, not merely a diplomatic incident. Any regime that begins its existence with such violent disregard for international norms and the sanctity of diplomacy cannot be trusted at the negotiating table.
Even decades later, there has been no genuine remorse, apology, or systemic change in behavior. On the contrary, Iran has used diplomacy as a strategic tool—not a sign of goodwill but a temporary tactic to relieve pressure and regroup. The U.S. must learn from history: regimes that do not change should not be rewarded with legitimacy.
Blood on Their Hands: From Beirut to Khobar
Iran’s terror apparatus has a long and bloody record of directly targeting American lives. The 1983 bombing of the U.S. Marine barracks in Beirut killed 241 American service members—an attack carried out by Hezbollah, Iran’s premier proxy. The 1996 Khobar Towers bombing in Saudi Arabia, which killed 19 American airmen, has been directly attributed to Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC). In Iraq and Afghanistan, Tehran’s provision of Explosively Formed Penetrators (EFPs) to Shiite militias resulted in the deaths and maiming of hundreds of U.S. troops.
Renewed negotiations with such a regime, without demanding justice for past atrocities, not only dishonors the victims but also emboldens a state sponsor of terrorism.
A Hub of Proxy Warfare and Destabilization
Iran’s malign activities are not confined within its borders. Through proxies like Hezbollah, Hamas, the Houthis, and Shiite militias in Iraq and Syria, Iran has consistently undermined regional stability and U.S. interests. These groups routinely target American allies and assets, and in many cases, directly endanger U.S. personnel.
Reentering a nuclear agreement without addressing these destabilizing activities sends the wrong message—it tells Tehran that its strategy of using terrorism and proxy violence is effective. Worse, any financial relief resulting from a new deal will only empower these networks further, fueling more bloodshed across the region and potentially against American targets.
A Nuclear Deal That Enables, Not Restrains
The 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) was flawed from the start. It offered Iran a path to nuclear legitimacy after sunset clauses expired, failed to restrict ballistic missile development, and lacked enforcement mechanisms for Iran’s non-nuclear malign behavior. Tehran used the financial windfall from sanctions relief not to improve the lives of its people, but to expand its regional aggression.
Any attempt to re-enter a similar deal without a complete overhaul would again legitimize the regime, offer billions in economic relief, and allow Iran to operate under the veneer of compliance while continuing covert nuclear work—as it has repeatedly been caught doing.
Jeopardizing U.S. National Security and Global Standing
By negotiating with a regime that is actively hostile, the U.S. compromises its credibility and weakens its deterrent posture. It sends a dangerous signal to both allies and adversaries that terrorism, hostage-taking, and regional sabotage can be rewarded with high-level diplomatic engagement and economic gain.
Moreover, by focusing singularly on nuclear issues, the U.S. risks ignoring the holistic threat posed by Iran—from its ideological warfare to cyber operations and its role in promoting anti-American sentiment globally.
Engagement with Iran should not be confused with appeasement. The Islamic Republic is not a rational actor looking for compromise—it is an expansionist theocracy committed to exporting its revolution and undermining U.S. influence. Any deal that fails to address the full spectrum of Iran’s malign behavior is not diplomacy—it’s capitulation.
The United States must stand firm, maintain maximum pressure, and support the Iranian people’s aspirations for freedom rather than validating a regime that has done everything in its power to oppose American values and endanger American lives. A nuclear deal that ignores these realities is not just flawed—it is a trap, and one that the U.S. must resolutely avoid.
پاسخی بگذارید