Reasons for cutting US-Iran ties 

February 1, 2023 - 23:1

Javan writes: Since the beginning of the Islamic Revolution (1979), some said the cause of Washington’s enmity toward Iran is Tehran's actions and claimed that if there were no anti-American policies in Iran, the U.S. would not have a reason for enmity.  

If these claims are true, why didn't America become hostile to Turkey, which after the coup, President Erdogan pointed the finger of accusation at America and made the harshest words? Or Saudi Arabia, which dismembered an American citizen in its consulate in Istanbul? 
So, the reason for America's enmity with Iran is not Iran's anti-American positions. 
In breaking the relationship between the U.S and Iran, firstly, Iran was never the initiator, and secondly, America's hostility with Iran is due to several major factors, including colonial interests of the liberal democratic system; arrogant spirit and superiority feeling; confrontation between the right and the wrong; constant failures of the West against Islamic civilization; and the identity of Iran's Islamic Revolution.

Arman-e-Melli: JCPOA died, long live JCPOA! 
 Arman-e-Melli writes: Iran adopted diplomacy in 2003 when the Westerners were moving toward confrontation, and this approach led to an agreement in Vienna in 2015. 
Nevertheless, Trump chose another path and once again created grounds for tension between Tehran and the West. Trump set the stage for tension by withdrawing from the JCPOA. 
While some U.S. officials say that returning to the JCPOA is not currently on their agenda, news are coming of their desire to continue consultations with Tehran. 
The JCPOA is dead because no one is trying to revive it, but many believe that the deal is still the best option to solve the nuclear challenge between Iran and the West, and efforts should be made to revive it. 
From this point of view, although the JCPOA is dead. Considering that the parties still talk about diplomacy and consider it the best solution, we can hope for its revival. But this hope is reasonable just for a short period of time. In other words, although the JCPOA is dead, there is no other choice but chanting ‘long live the JCPOA’.

Aftab Yazd: White House does not want Al-Sudani 
Aftab Yazd wrote: Although volatile developments in a year finally pushed Iraq toward peace, it did not satisfy the Westerners and the Arab governments of the region. That's why some factions are not happy with the reforms initiated by Mohammed Shia' Al Sudani, the prime minister of the Republic of Iraq. 
By putting pressure on Iraq's financial system, the Americans have put the country in trouble. 
Hassan Hanizadeh, a political analyst on West Asian affairs, said in an interview with Aftab Yazd that since 2003, America's interference in Iraq has been quite obvious. 
America's view of Iraq since the fall of Saddam has been completely colonialist, and whenever the elected prime minister does not agree with the policies of the United States, he faces problems. 
  Newly-released reports show that the U.S. Treasury has blocked a large sum of Iraq's oil revenues. 
Therefore, Mohammed Shia' Al Sudani has had a serious challenge with the U.S. after he took over as prime minister, and the Americans may not even allow Al-Sudani to continue his job.

Resalat: JCPOA nature has changed and value of negotiations has decreased 
Analysts believe that the recent action of the European Parliament has changed the nature of the JCPOA.  

 Also, recently former U.S. President Barack Obama's special representative for the Middle East has said that the revival of the JCPOA would be costly for the Biden administration and emphasized that Washington is currently looking for a new agreement with Tehran. 

Regarding the recent action of the European Parliament against the IRGC and its impact on the JCPOA, Fouad Izadi, a political analyst on international relations, told Resalat: the JCPOA negotiations do not have equal value for the public opinion, officials, and experts. 

For some the JCPOA is very valuable but for others not, he added. 

 Due to the recent moves of the European Parliament and the United States, the nature of the JCPOA has changed, the university professor argued. 

Izadi further added: The recent move by the European Parliament was not against the IRGC. The parliament was about to reduce the benefits of the JCPOA for the Islamic Republic.

Etemad: Regional JCPOA is a strategic priority 
The Etemad newspaper writes: It seems that revitalizing the JCPOA with the participation of the U.S. is not a priority for the time being. In the current situation, in order to revive the JCPOA, smaller parts must be connected together to revive the deal. One of these smaller components in the Middle East is a comprehensive security and economic agreement with the Arab countries in the Persian Gulf in the form of a "regional JCPOA". 
  Obviously, the prerequisite for achieving the “regional JCPOA” is to accept it as a strategic priority in Iran’s foreign policy. 
The “regional JCPOA” requires acceptance of interest-oriented and development-oriented foreign policy (i.e., a foreign policy based on national interest and development), acceptance of military, non-military and security-based deterrence to achieve the goals. 

In other words, reaching a collective agreement with regional actors, first of all, requires determining the spheres of influence, proxy forces, and security arrangements through trust-building. 

Military must necessarily be in the direction of economic strengthening and development of the country. 

Therefore, the first condition for success in any negotiation and agreement is a strategic view toward building stable trust between actors and realizing development goals. This is important because the current negotiations with Saudi Arabia and the regional agreement cannot be viewed as a mere tactic and a solution only to solve foreign policy problems.

Leave a Comment