In the wake of President Trump’s decision to pull out of the Iran nuclear agreement, Parsi’s editorial lays out terms of the debate the Iran lobby wants to have with the Trump administration, arguing that:
• The opportunity for a more comprehensive deal was a fiction;
• Iran was already becoming a nuclear power;
• The negotiation’s breakthrough was due to President Obama’s willingness to concede Iran had a right to enrich uranium;
• Iran was not brought to the table by economic sanctions.
In an article by Laura Carnahan, she writes, “Unfortunately for Parsi every single one of his arguments have been proven wrong with the passage of time and no thanks to his masters in Tehran who have striven to disprove everything through their own actions.”
She claims that the impact of economic sanctions was pushed the Iranian regime’s leadership to look for a way out of an economic crisis. However, according to Parsi, the mullahs stepped up their nuclear activities in response to sanctions. Carnahan alleges that Iran crashed their nuclear program to force the issue of negotiations over a nuclear deal in order to gain relief from the sanctions, instead.
Iran’s economy was stagnating, as was its military. Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei wanted to get the deal concluded as quickly as possible so the regime could begin rebuilding its military, which has been put to use in Syria on behalf of the Assad regime.
Carnahan writes, “Any international agreement is predicated on an assumption that both parties are rational, truthful and obligated to the deal, but in the case of the Iranian regime, a religious theocracy is in charge that has little regard for human life and values survival above all else.”
Iran didn’t seem to be committed to improving the state of the economy and the lives of its citizens, as it diverted most of the financial windfall it received towards supporting terrorist groups such as Hezbollah, financing the Assad regime in Syria and upgrading its military with offensive weapons.
Instead of broadening its government to political moderates and opponents, it eliminated most potential candidates from its presidential and parliamentary elections following the nuclear deal.
While Iran’s leaders may argue that the Trump administration’s true aim is to seek war, it offers no proof. The evidence displays a different path. The strategy towards Iran is to pursue diplomacy and work within the framework of America’s allies.
Parsi tries to portray U.S. efforts at regime change as an attempt to install dissident groups he terms as “terrorists.” He has singled out the Mujahedin-e Khalq (MEK), which has publicly staked their future on the idea of a secular and democratic Iran in which the people are allowed to make their own choices in free elections. Far from “terrorism”, the MEK are working toward a free Iran.