Eunomia

Eunomia

Share this post

Eunomia
Eunomia
The WSJ's Bad Revisionism on U.S. Iran Policy

The WSJ's Bad Revisionism on U.S. Iran Policy

If containing Iran is the proverbial white whale, that should tell us that the U.S. needs to abandon the pursuit before it leads to ruin in the form of another unnecessary war.

Daniel Larison's avatar
Daniel Larison
Jun 30, 2024
∙ Paid
13

Share this post

Eunomia
Eunomia
The WSJ's Bad Revisionism on U.S. Iran Policy
2
6
Share

A new Wall Street Journal report on Iran and U.S. policy contains this bizarre claim:

For more than two decades, Western policy on Iran has vacillated. American presidents repeatedly shifted the balance between diplomacy and force, outreach and attempted isolation. 

The U.S. approach to Iran has not changed that much from one administration to another in this century. The report’s summary is not accurate. U.S. policy has been defined by harsh sanctions and collective punishment of the population. Unfortunately, there hasn’t been much wavering from that approach in the last twenty years.

Obama’s policy was somewhat different from that of other presidents in that he was prepared to agree to sanctions relief in exchange for major concesssions on the nuclear issue, but even this brief period of modest compromise was bookended by intense economic warfare. Even when Obama was at his most accommodating, U.S. policy towards Iran was still generally hostile and coercive. The moment of the most significant “outreach” to Tehran involved agreeing to stop strangling Iran’s economy, and it was taken for granted that the “outreach” ended there.

This post is for paid subscribers

Already a paid subscriber? Sign in
© 2025 Daniel Larison
Privacy ∙ Terms ∙ Collection notice
Start writingGet the app
Substack is the home for great culture

Share