BlogAcquiescence as a Strategy on Iran

Acquiescence as a Strategy on Iran


By Hamid Yazdan Panah

Documentary evidence often contains some simple truths with respect to policy and politics towards Iran. Recent revelations by Wikileaks with respect to CIA Director John Brennan emails offer an example of this type of documentary evidence with respect to policy on Iran. The documents reveal a policy which follows a strategy of acquiescence on Iran, and demonstrates that US policy is neither a lapse in judgement or an act of benevolence, but a calculated stance with respect to political interests.

 The paper labeled “The Conundrum of Iran” appears to be incomplete, however it contains some interesting tidbits. First and foremost the paper opens with:

“With a population of over 70 million, xx percent of the world’s proven oil reserves, a geostrategic location of tremendous (enviable?) significance, and a demonstrated potential to develop a nuclear-weapons program, the United States has no choice but to find a way to coexist—and to come to terms—with whatever government holds power in Tehran.” [sic]

As a starting point for policy we see that not only is regime change completely off the table, it also serves to pave the way for later recommendations which are viewed as an inevitable part of accepting the regime in Iran. This includes the following:
1) Tone Down the Rhetoric:
2) Establish a Direct Dialogue with Tehran
3) Seek Realistic, Measureable Steps
4) Hold Out Meaningful Carrots, as Well as Sticks

Now these don’t tell us anything new or surprising by themselves. However, as part of a supposedly confidential record at the highest level of the US government it confirms once again that the United States has sought a policy of appeasement and engagement with the regime in Tehran.

Now is that so horrible you may ask? Well from the perspective of Iranian dissidents who want nothing more than to overthrow the regime in Tehran, the paper demonstrates that the concept of democracy, human rights, or progressive change are not part of the political calculus of the West. In fact the brief paper makes no mention of any of those terms, or the appalling situation for dissidents, political prisoners, or minorities in Iran.

Instead what is outlined in the paper is the geopolitical and economic benefits posed by the theocratic regime in Iran. One can assume that those who produced this paper have already come to the conclusion that the aspirations of the people of this country, or concepts such as democracy, human rights, and civil liberties are irrelevant in policy discussions on Iran.

Hamid Yazdan Panah is an Iranian-American human rights activist and attorney focused on immigration and asylum in the San Francisco Bay Area.

Latest news

Iran Regime’s Response to Protests Censorship and Violence

The Iranian regime’s leadership has reacted to the ongoing wave of protests over the death of Mahsa Amini, the...

Iran’s New Generation Seeks Nothing but Regime Change

In a silly and desperate statement, the Iranian regime’s foreign minister Hossein Amir-Abdollahian claimed that nothing special is going...

Iran’s Youths Broke the Spell of Fear

One of the main characteristics of the recent protests in Iran is the courage and fearlessness of the people,...

Iran Is on the Brink of a Revolution

The wall of fear has been broken. In many cities across Iran, women are taking to the streets, leading...

Iran’s Regime Claims To Fill Global Energy Gap Despite Crippled Petroleum Sector

In recent weeks, the Iranian regime’s officials have been constantly exaggerating their huge capacity in oil and gas reserves...

What Is Happening in Iran?

Following the brutal killing of Masha Amini, the Iranian people have once again united to fight and defeat the...

Must read

AP Exclusive: Shot Iranian said to be nuke expert

AP: A man shot dead on a Tehran street...

Iran FM threatens retaliation in event of US strike

AFP: Iran will retaliate in the event of a...

You might also likeRELATED
Recommended to you