Tehran – Depending on the political trends, we may see ongoing Iran and the US involvement in different ways.
On the positive side, it is optimistically seen as a potentially new chapter of the “problem” (because there is no better word) between Iran and the US, putting both countries at the threshold of a new era.
There is also a dark side to this story. It depicts Iran at a nuclear bomb threshold and on the brink of the US trigger. Therefore, it is essential to move beyond direct/indirect dichotomy. This has recently plagued the report on lectures and allows us to see the true essence of this engagement.
The next lecture began quickly, and saying that both countries’ interests were higher than ever before was a tired refrain.
Negotiators on both sides must be keenly aware of the pitfalls and unexpected twists that could overturn the sensitive process. There is an immeasurable and structurally advantageous interest in the current failure of diplomatic engagement. Such an actor is challenging first-person Israel, but interest groups would have rather placed Iran at the table than sitting on it! The mere idea of Iran and the US involvement, regardless of the end result, seduces them into a crazy frenzy to portray Iran as a single villain, stripped of sovereignty and portray the axis of evil as a monolithic villain!
But let’s not be naive. These entities and interest groups are not simply voices of dissatisfaction. They are meticulously organized, deeply entrenched, and abundantly resourced. With extensive leverage on media platforms, they skillfully craft and spread stories designed to distort the discourse surrounding Iran and its dealings.
Of particular interest is the hilarious union between the good old Democrats and the Neocon and the Iranian Hawks! You probably didn’t expect that with your imagination to grow, the JCPOA would have literally concluded it with broken limbs.
The War Lobby is recruiting dissatisfied Democrats and seems to be luring them in with relevance and redness! In this twisted dance, what’s good for Joe is clearly bad for Donald, a partisan dissonance of irony. The irony is almost poetic. The very concept of diplomacy has diminished to pawn in the relentless game of war lobby where Iran was cast as an eternal villain and engagement is heresy.
Iran’s problems over the past 50 years have been turbulent. No one denied that. As the historian John Gazvinians properly observe, the Iranian-US story always appears to begin at the end. The end of this engagement will certainly give way to a new era. High-ranking officials from both countries have shown an eagerness to turn new pages.
To close the hopeful note, I turn to what Ronald Reagan said. Perhaps these formation policies in Washington will reflect history, rethink their past decisions on Iran, and promote a more constructive, future-looking approach.