The US-Iran Deal: A Diplomatic Triumph or a Dangerous Precedent
In the intricate chess game of international politics, the recent move by the United States to strike a deal with Iran has ignited widespread debate. The agreement involved unfreezing $6 billion of Iranian funds and releasing Iranian prisoners held in America, in return for the liberation of five American hostages. While many view this deal as a diplomatic triumph, others, especially those who have experienced firsthand the cruelty of the Iranian regime, see an unsettling picture.
To understand the concerns surrounding the deal, we must first revisit the oppressive nature of the Iranian regime. Last week, we commemorated the tragic death of Mahsa Jina Amini, a woman mercilessly killed by the Iranian regime for defying the dress code. This grim anniversary was marked by the detention of at least 600 women in Tehran alone, a stark reminder of the regime's blatant disregard for fundamental human rights. Despite these disturbing realities, Brett McGurk, the National Security Council's Coordinator for the Middle East and Africa, defended the recent deal. He claimed on CNN that the unfrozen billions would benefit not the Iranian regime, but the people. McGurk asserted that a humanitarian channel has been established to allow Iran to procure food, medicine, medical devices, and agricultural products from third-party vetted vendors, with the Treasury Department overseeing the process. However, this explanation raises more questions than it answers considering Iranian President Ebrahim Raisi stated that the funds will be spent “Wherever we need it”. In a recent interview with NBC News, Raisi said “This money belongs to the Iranian people, the Iranian government, so the Islamic Republic of Iran will decide what to do with this money”. He also went on to say, “humanitarian means whatever the Iranian people needs, so this money will be budgeted for those needs, and the needs of the Iranian people will be decided and determined by the Iranian government”. Considering the Iranian government has the blood of thousands of its own people on its hand, one can understand the need for concern here.
The Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) is labeled as a terrorist Organization in the United States and in a recent Press Briefing with Matthew Miller, Department of State Spokesperson, Mr. Miller states that America will continue to impose sanctions on the Iranian government when events warrant that. Yet paradoxically, visas were issued to IRGC members, effectively welcoming individuals on a sanctions list onto American soil. Moreover, Iranian regime president Ebrahim Raisi, who is under US sanctions, was just in the US and when asked about whether they are still plotting to kill former US officials in regard to the death of Qassim Soleimani, he responds with “that cannot be forgotten or forgiven…how can we overlook this criminal act? The perpetrators must meet the punishment for the crime committed”.
Beyond the concern of the behavior of the Iranian government since the deal took place, the deal did not even result in the release of all US nationals, including Jamshid Sharmahd and Shahab Dalili. They were left behind. Notably, the State Department recently urged no travel to Iran yet Sharmahd was kidnapped in Dubai and extradited to Iran. The only individual that did not go to Iran himself and was kidnapped in a different country, was left behind in the deal.
The deal's consequences extend beyond the immediate release of American hostages. It has set a precedent for future interactions, one that might embolden the Iranian regime and embolden surrounding countries that Iran funds, such as Lebanon. The case of Amer Fakhoury further emphasizes the urgency of this issue. Fakhoury, a US citizen held in Lebanon under the Iranian-backed Hezbollah, tragically died due to illegal detention. His family still awaits justice, a stark reminder of the human cost behind these political machinations. According to the Robert Levinson Hostage Recovery and Hostage-Taking Accountability Act, the US possesses the legal tools to hold individuals and governments accountable for illegal detentions, yet this act is only good on paper. In Fakhoury's case, no actions have been taken so far and it has been over 3 years. His story underlines the need for a more robust response from the US government, one that goes beyond merely securing the release of some hostages to ensuring that perpetrators are held accountable. Since 1981, the US has paid Iran $15.7 billion, according to a MEMRI report. This recent deal adds to the trend of placating the Iranian regime without demanding significant commitments to improve human rights or halt other oppressive behaviors.
In conclusion, while it is crucial to safeguard our citizens abroad, we must ensure our actions do not inadvertently encourage more atrocities or embolden oppressive regimes. The recent US-Iran deal warrants serious scrutiny. Are we inadvertently rewarding a regime that routinely disregards human rights, and are we setting dangerous precedents for the future? As we ponder these questions, let us remember the real human cost behind these political maneuvers and strive for a course of action that upholds justice, accountability, and the preservation of human rights.