Obama confirms that his administration will not limit itself to protocols and diplomacy if Iran decides to settle the nuclear issue, but he doesn’t guarantee Iran’s collaboration in solving this issue.
He knows well that this issue between Iran and the West is subject to the behavior of Iran’s leadership. He also knows that the real problem resides in the contradiction in the modus operandi of the government in Iran, as the pillars of the regime are in need for this contradiction in order to nurture the anti-West feelings so as to carry on.
If this wasn’t the case, the Iranians would have to overcome all pending issues with the United States and its allies more than 30 years ago, so this is the reason behind Obama’s doubts in the sincerity of Iran in dealing with the international community.
In spite of these facts, the Iranian regime insists on creating additional crises in the Middle East and igniting an arms race in the region, posing threats to the diverse countries. We have witnessed in the last years the huge armament deals concluded in the region for the sake of acquiring a modern arsenal and defense systems to face the Iranian threats in the region.
So even if the world overcomes the issue of the Iranian nuclear project, what about the 5,000 km strong Iranian rockets, which Iran claims to develop for peaceful purposes, such as space exploration projects, although they can literally pose a threat to all the nations of the world, which means that the problem is bigger than the nuclear project, as it is within the behavior of the regime itself.
In fact, militarization is a deep rooted policy within the structure of the Iranian regime, and it goes deeper to reach the foundation of the regime itself and the thinking of its leadership. The Supreme Advisor of the Iranian Republic, the Revolutionary Guard and Security forces control the government of the country and interfere in every details, no matter how small or big, they hold tightly the key economic sectors, including smuggling, to support their militarization based policies, which makes it impossible to seek peaceful and diplomatic ways to solve the conflict.
Militarization has become part of the persona of the regime and its identity, that is why it becomes more rebellious and creates consecutive crises whenever the world attempts to cope with it, and whenever it feels out of reach, it creates new crises.
Obama knows well that there is no dead end in politics, and that there is always the need to seek a way to negotiate, but with whom? And at what price? Is it worth seeking diplomatic talks with a military regime and minds that do not understand in diplomacy?
In the past years, Iran lost many opportunities although its strategic location allows her to strengthen its position to establish strong ties with the countries of the region, based on dignity and respect, which could guarantee big benefits to its own people, and provide security, stability and constructive collaboration to its neighbors.
Dialogue with any entity that doesn’t have the sense of purpose in negotiating and lacks the principles of logic is useless, even if an agreement is reached, as it will be fragile and weak, such as the former agreements announced between Iran and the Super Powers as a result of former rounds of negotiations in the past years.
And it seems that Obama understood that the Iranian Regime is not harmonious, and is not in a status that will enable it to deal with the international community, that’s why when he spoke about negotiations he actually put Iran in hot waters, giving her leaders the opportunity to change their attitude and to become blameless towards the world if the U.S. decides to take additional steps against Iran.
*The author is an Iranian writer and activist.