There is no doubt that Barack Obama, with the key help of his secretary of state John Kerry who ran for the presidential elections in 2004, put in all of his efforts to finalize the nuclear agreement with Iran. During the long and tough negotiations, it was clear that the Iranians knew that Obama was keener than they were to reach a deal.
Of course, all American presidents are keen to fulfill any achievements regarding a thorny issue. For instance, Bill Clinton tried to reach a final solution for the Palestinian issue and he almost succeeded if it hadn’t been for the issue of the refugees’ return.
Due to Obama’s eagerness and relentless efforts to finalize the deal, he made grave mistakes and offered concessions that were much more than Tehran’s rulers had expected. The Republicans as well as some Democrats opposed this.
Such fascist regimes do not believe in peace and cannot be trusted. Therefore, when Obama handed over billions of dollars to Iran, before the ink was barely dry on the agreement, it showed its teeth and spent this money to support its expansionist policyAhmad al-Farraj
However, Kerry, the godfather of the negotiations who also has friendly relations with Iran’s politicians, did not care about any of this and was willing to make even more concessions, as what was important was to finalize the agreement at any price. This is what eventually happened.
Is it Obama's fault?
We cannot accuse Obama of violating America’s policy towards Iran as he, like other American politicians, believe it’s not a friendly state.
However, Obama was a dove of peace. He believed in the policy of appeasement, therefore, he thought he could contain Iran via peace instead of confrontation and war. It’s interesting that although Obama is an intellectual and a knowledgeable politician, he did not realize – or perhaps he ignored – the fact that Iran is an ideological regime that has a specific aim which is expansion.
Such fascist regimes do not believe in peace and cannot be trusted. Therefore, when Obama handed over billions of dollars to Iran, before the ink was barely dry on the agreement, it showed its teeth and spent this money to support its expansionist policy by supporting extremist organizations instead of spending it to support developmental projects and improve citizens’ livelihood.
Iranian politicians thus begun to brag about occupying Arab capitals and we’ve even seen how Iranian generals managed some countries via their proxies.
Trump has opposed the nuclear deal since the first day of running for the elections, which is exactly what’s expected from a Republican hawk. He told his supporters that the deal was not fair to the US and its allies. He maintained this stance after winning the elections and his opposition of the deal actually intensified after Iran tested its ballistic missiles.
ALSO READ: Will Trump’s move on Iran bring focus on denuclearization?
Many commentators thought that he will not be able to convince the departments of defense and state and the Central Intelligence Agency to withdraw from the agreement; however, he did in the end. The substantial changes in his administration played a significant role here as Mike Pompeo is not Rex Tillerson and John Bolton is not McMaster.
Other countries involved in the agreement were shocked as they did not think Trump was this bold. They missed the fact that his credibility was on the line and that he cannot be defeated in the face of Iran and his greatest opponents, Obama, Kerry and Angela Merkel. Discussing this last point alone requires another article.
This article is also available in Arabic.
Dr. Ahmad al-Farraj is a Saudi writer with al-Jazirah daily. He holds a Masters degree in literature from the University of Indiana and a PhD in Linguistics from the University of Michigan. He was the Dean of the Arabic Language Institute in King Saud University and a member of the university’s council. He tweets under @amhfarraj.