Iran
was a source of instability and violence all across the region before during
the International sanctions, but now, Sanctions have been lifted on
her , and logically a moment of change
should arrive . Although it is heard
that “it could be a unique opportunity, but the main question is , if anything
will be changed in the Middle East , and if the diplomacy of the Middle East could
now change, for better or for worse !
But be very wary of
anyone who claims anything more, and certainly be careful of anyone who claims
anything more for Iran itself. President Hassan Rouhani is not Mikhail
Gorbachev, and this is not a perestroika moment. Iran is not “opening up” or
becoming “more Western” or somehow more liberal. On the contrary, the level of
repression inside the country has grown since the “moderate” Rouhani was
elected in 2013. The number of death sentences has risen. In 2014, Iran carried
out the largest number of executions anywhere in the world except for
China. Last year, the number may have exceeded 2000. Partly this is because
Iran’s chief justice has boasted of the eradication of drug
offenders, many of whom are juveniles or convicted on dubious evidence.
Moderation is an
illusion in Iran
Political
pressure and religious discrimination have been increased, too. Women who don’t
wear veils are still vulnerable to arrest and sentencing. The penalties for
apostasy, adultery and … are still high, up to and including capital punishment.
Cultural dissidents are under pressure, too, even more so since the
sanctions-lifting deal was announced.
The International Campaign for Human
Rights in Iran noted that many political prisoners, including
some foreigners, remain in Iranian prisons.
If it was possible to separate all of these stories
into a box and call Iran a country with “bad human rights” but “improving
foreign policy,” then maybe there would be a case for ignoring them. But — as
we’ve learned to our cost, in Russia, among other places — regimes that need
violence to repress their citizens do not make reliable diplomatic partners.
Any ruling clique that fears popular revolt will always, at the end of the day,
tailor its foreign policy to the goal of keeping itself in power. Right now,
Rouhani and his foreign minister, think that lifting sanctions will help
improve Iran’s economy and create popular support. But if it doesn’t, then they
or their successors will immediately direct public anger and emotion at the
Great Satan once again.
The same warning applies
to the Western businessmen lining up at the borders to enter Iran. No doubt
there will be many Iranians willing to help them get rich, if it’s mutually
beneficial. No doubt some will make money, though it might be hard to hold on
to it in a country whose courts are politicized and whose judges are selected
in an arbitrary and opaque process. But either way, there isn’t much point in
wishfully hoping that foreign investment will “open up” Iran, either: In the
current circumstances, foreign investment is far more likely to enrich the
existing elite. If so, the result will be greater repression, more effective
disinformation and, of course, more money for the export of terrorism and crime
the ideology of the Iranian revolution to Syria, Lebanon and Iraq.
So, yes, change may come
to Middle Eastern diplomacy. But change has not come to Iran yet. And until it
does, Iran will remain a source of instability and violence all across the
region.
