Iran - do the facts matter?

Shannon Bohrer

(9/2019) Before Trump was elected president he criticized the Iran deal that was made under the Obama administration. He said the deal did not cover other weapons, and when elected he would cancel the agreement and seek regime change.

The history of the Iran deal is well documented. In 2015, the Obama administration was one of several countries that made an agreement with Iran for the purpose of deterring the proliferation of nuclear weapons. Just prior to the agreement there was a consensus that without the agreement, Iran could build a nuclear weapon in about three months. After the agreement, the consensus was that if Iran cheated, it would take them one year to build a weapon. However, with the required monitoring and access, the world would know if the agreement were violated.

The other countries involved in the agreement included; England, France, Russia, Germany and China. Additionally, over 100 countries from around the world expressed their support for the agreement. Nuclear physicists’ non-proliferation experts and even military officials, from around the world also supported the agreement. In statements they believed it was "the best solution available to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon without taking military action."

After being elected Trump continued to criticize the agreement saying the agreement did not go far enough. He repeated that the agreement left open the ability for Iran to develop and construct other weapons. On May 8, 2018 he announced the U.S. would withdraw from the deal. Trump said "Giving $1.8 billion in cash [to Iran] in actual cash carried out in barrels and in boxes from airplanes," added to the bad deal. The National Security Director added that the administration would add new sanctions to force Iran back to the negotiations and the U.S. would be seeking regime change. The other countries involved in the deal, have not withdrawn.

Trump’s claim that the United States gave Iran 1.8 billion in cash, is incorrect. The agreement to not build nuclear weapons lifted some of the decade’s old economic sanctions that had been placed against Iran after the 1979 Iranian revolution. The sanctions had prohibited Iran from collecting their own monies and other assets from around the world that had been frozen. The monies were estimated to be "tens of billions of dollars in oil revenue and frozen assets." The majority of the monies that Iran would eventually receive would come from commercial banks from around the world.

The history of Iran, related to the president’s actions is relevant and important. From November 4, 1979 to January 20, 1981, Iran held fifty two American hostages, after a group of Iranian college students, who supported the Iranian Revolution, took over the U.S. Embassy in Tehran. After numerous negotiations the hostages were released. Part of the negotiations included an international arbitration, to resolve how monies, that had been frozen, would be returned to each country.

The international arbitration (the Iran-United States Claims Tribunal) has been in existence since January 1981. Both the United State and Iran returned assets to each respective country as early as 1983. However, there were still private claims outstanding. The claims included refunds for military parts that Iran had paid for, but never received, as well as the interest on those paymetns. The parts were ordered under Iran’s monarch Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi.

In 2015, when the Iranian deal was made, the U.S. paid Iran around $400 million, as part of the international arbitration agreement going back to 1981. At that time the U.S. was accused of paying for prisoners, since Iran had just released five Americans being held in Iran. However, the 400 million was for military parts that we never delivered. After the Iranian deal in 2015, the sanctions were lifted and monies were returned. However, third party claims still existed. Two days after paying the 400 million, the U.S. paid Iran 1.3 billion, for interest related to the undelivered military parts going back to 1979. The U.S. paid what they owed.

Now our government wants to revisit the deal and has imposed more sanctions. Those are the facts, but not the whole story. The other counties that were involved the 2015 deal, are not in agreement to withdraw from the deal. Literally, it is a mess and because of military movements on both sides there are Middle East experts predicting that we could end up in another war. Even, if Iran agreed to re-negotiate and they gave up additional demands, they won’t agree to regime change, according to the experts.

In the 1979 revolution the Shah, who was a monarch, was overthrown. The Shah had been the ruler of Iran, since 1953, when he came to power in a coup, against the former government. At that time the coup deposed the elected Prime Minister of Iran, Mohammad Mosaddegh. The prime minister had been popular because of social reforms and progressive economic policies that he instituted. His problem, as it turned out, was that he nationalized the Iranian Oil industry. Prior to the nationalization of the oil industry, it had been controlled by Great Britain through the Anglo-Iranian Oil Company.

The British and Prime Minister Mosaddegh had been in talks for months over the Iranian oil industry. The negotiations ceased when Iran refused to allow the British any ownership or control of Iranian oil. The British complained to the United States and it was the United States and the British intelligences services that orchestrated the coup that overthrew the Iranian government.

An elected leader, who believed in the rule of law, in a limited democracy was deposed and a dictator was installed. The dictator, the Shah, installed a secret police and ended Iran’s limited democracy. Iranians knew the history; that in 1953 we orchestrated a coup that ended their limited democracy. That information was front and center in the 1979 revolution that ousted the Shah. Since the ouster Iran has gone back to a limited democracy.

The real story is that we helped to eliminate a limited democracy in the Middle East. We then supported a dictator, with a secret police. The country overthrew the dictator and has since re-instated their limited democracy. They signed an agreement not pursue the building of a nuclear weapon, along with the U.S. and five other nations. They were in compliance with the agreement and we withdrew from it, demanding more sanctions - and we are seeking regime change?

The regime change we should be looking for should be our own.