Never Ever Listen to Iran Hawks

Xiyue Wang’s op-ed on Iran includes an unwitting acknowledgment that the hawkish policies that he now defends benefit Iranian hard-liners:

When I was being interrogated in Evin Prison in summer 2016, my interrogator boasted that he and his hard-line colleagues were eager to see Donald Trump elected, not because the regime viewed him as the type of pragmatic leader they could deal with, but because it would justify a more confrontational stance against the Great Satan [bold mine-DL].

By his own admission, Iranian hard-liners welcomed Trump’s election because it played into their hands. This is an implicit acknowledgment that the atmosphere that had been created by the successful conclusion of the nuclear deal talks was inimical to the hard-line camp. Because Trump promised to tear up the agreement, his election was a boon for the worst elements of the regime. Mr. Wang cites this as proof that there is no point in engaging Iran, but it actually demonstrates that the “maximum pressure” policy that he defends is a dead end that aids the very people that kept him in prison for years.

The Iranian government’s wrongful detention of American citizens and dual nationals is outrageous, and the U.S. rightly objects to such hostage-taking. Mr. Wang suffered for many years at the hands of that government, and he is entitled to hold them in contempt and bear witness to the nature of the brutal treatment meted out to prisoners. Unfortunately, over the last year he has made a terrible mistake of throwing his support behind cruel and destructive policies that only strengthen the grip of the regime that he detests. He has become a reliable supporter of “maximum pressure” sanctions that have achieved nothing except to inflict more misery on the Iranian people. Most recently, he has joined with other Iran hawks in trying to smear Ariane Tabatabai, an Iranian-American scholar with a stellar and well-deserved reputation, because she is joining the State Department. People are free to disagree with Dr. Tabatabai’s analysis and the Biden administration’s policies, but spreading misinformation and falsehoods about them is unacceptable. (One of the tweets in question has since been deleted.)

Regrettably, Mr. Wang has become almost a caricature of an Iran hawk with his strident rhetoric:

The menace of the Islamic Republic can’t be appeased. It must be countered and restrained. Only the U.S. has the capacity to lead such an endeavor. For 42 years Iran has demonstrated that it changes its behavior only in response to strength in the form of American-led international pressure. If the Biden administration returns to the JCPOA without extracting concessions from Tehran beyond the nuclear threat, it will relinquish all U.S. leverage over the regime.

This is ideology masquerading as analysis. It is not true that Iran “changes its behavior only in response to strength.” On the contrary, Iranian willingness to accept restrictions on its nuclear program came in response to flexibility from the U.S. and the rest of the P5+1. Inflexible shows of “strength” have predictably made Iran’s government more intransigent, and the last four years of bankrupt “maximum pressure” have proven that beyond any doubt. The U.S. forfeited whatever influence it might have had with the Iranian government the day that Trump reneged on the JCPOA. Rejoining the agreement and honoring our commitments to provide sanctions relief are the first steps to regaining some of that influence.

Mr. Wang is a scholar of Iranian history, but strangely he seems blind to the views of the Iranian people today. Large majorities of Iranians support their government’s actions over the last year and a half in response to the “maximum pressure” campaign and other provocations. A majority of Iranians oppose concessions on Iran’s missile program. Iranian leaders that entered negotiations requiring additional concessions would be committing political suicide at home. It’s not surprising that most Iranians don’t trust the U.S. to keep its word when our government has proven that it can’t be trusted. The point here is that there are no more concessions to be “extracted.” The U.S. can go back to having a functioning JCPOA that keeps the possibility of future diplomacy alive, or it can try to use its “leverage” and end up with nothing at all. As always, Iran hawks give bad advice that the Biden administration would do well to dismiss.