mogarini-zarif

Abdolrahman Mahabadi, political writer and analyst

As President Trump’s May-12 deadline for fixing Iran nuclear deal gets closer, speculations about the fate of the deal are on the rise, with some predicting that the United States will walk away from the deal and some saying otherwise.

Meanwhile, the Iranian regime and its associated lobbies seek to push the idea that the US withdrawal from the deal will spark a new war in the Middle East, thus trying to scare public opinion of such a decision.

Fundamental to an accurate analysis of the situation, however, is that we have a true understanding of the nature of the Iranian regime, which has just entered its 40th year. Without an exact understanding, it won’t be possible to describe what happens when the deadline is over.

Coming to power with the help of a reactionary-colonial political objective, the Iranian regime took advantage of people’s religious tendencies from the very beginning, laying the foundation of its formation and survival by adopting an expansionist policy through waging wars.

Subdued by the strategy the newly arrived Iranian regime had deployed, many in the region first adopted a soft policy to deal with the regime, a policy that only emboldened the regime and led to its increased interventions in the domestic affairs of regional countries throughout the coming years, with Iraq, Syria, Yemen, and Lebanon as bitter realities of the current era being the most obvious examples in this regard.

Adopting such a policy towards the fundamentalist Iranian regime was not limited to the region alone, but it was expanded to many parts of the world as well, with the world’s biggest countries turning a blind eye on regime’s atrocities, particularly with regard to its human rights record.

The policy, however, didn’t stop the hegemonic regime ruling Iran. Through such measures like “launching a fake moderate faction within the regime“ and “generously giving away Iran’s oil and money to Western appeasers”, the Iranian regime could win West’s ignorance or support in the face of its atrocities.

Thanks to a “remain silent or support in exchange for oil or money” policy, the Iranian regime had succeeded to pursue its dangerous intentions in the region, killing dissidents both at home and abroad while taking its nuclear program to an advanced level. The international community’s unawareness of the regime’s too dangerous nuclear program shows how harmful the West’s appeasement policy towards the regime really was, and if it wasn’t for the Iranian opposition NCRI’s disclosures, the program would’ve changed the fate of human society.

But it seemed the West was still sleeping a few years after the disclosures and the game had to enter the 90th minute before they decided to wake up, since the deal they signed with the Iranian regime actually served the regime’s interests, as it didn’t completely ban the regime from acquiring a nuclear weapon.

Nonetheless, it’s crucial that the Iranian regime be absolutely banned from acquiring a nuclear weapon; a fact that the international community has just begun to fully grasp, throwing the ball back into the Iranian regime’s court by setting the May-12 deadline.

It’s not surprising to see how the United States and major Middle East countries are now moving away from the policy of appeasement and making concessions to the Iranian regime, while adopting a new decisive policy that will undoubtedly affect other countries’ approaches as well.

Iranian regime’s acquiring the nuclear weapon could seriously endanger not only the region but the entire world, since the vilayat-e-faqih’s reactionary, fundamentalist way of thinking knows no boundaries for its sovereignty: the whole world should be under the rule of a God of whom the mullahs are representatives!

The May-12 deadline for fixing Iran nuclear deal should be looked upon with such an understanding of the regime in mind. Will the regime agree to US conditions? Is the United States serious about leaving the deal? Will the deal be abolished if the regime refuses to accede to US terms? And will a war begin should the United States leave the deal?

There are many other such questions that might be answered one by one. But what could be said for sure is that the regime will come out of the deadline weaker than ever. And what will follow the deadline will be yet another starting point for the regime to suffer more defeats and eventually collapse.

An accurate realization of the nature of the war-mongering regime ruling Iran tells us that regardless of the ups and downs in the issue, a regime change in Iran is getting closer day after day.

If the regime accedes to the new sunset clause, that would be an even more effective poisoned chalice than the 2015 nuclear deal, immediately affecting regime’s entire body.

And if the regime refuses to accept the new conditions, there’ll be more crippling sanctions pouring in. And if there’s going to be a new war, it would be the Iranian regime that would start it, with the result being quite clear in advance.

The nuclear deal ‘May-12’ deadline is looming at a time when Iranian people’s uprising has taken Iran’s situation to a whole new stage, making it more and more difficult for the regime to breathe, survive, move forward or even retreat.
The uprising showed that the Iranian people are not going to settle for anything less than a regime change.

It’s not the fate of the nuclear deal that the Iranian regime is fully scared of (though not so long ago it was), but it’s an accelerating movement that started with the uprising and has now put a regime change in the short-term perspective. For Iranian people and opposition, the importance of the fate of the nuclear deal is that which option is going to accelerate this change and huge development. So, what Iranian people and the subversive opposition should focus on is getting more prepared than ever to make this huge development happen in Iran, for Iran.

Posted in Nuclear