ArtsAutosBooksBusinessEducationEntertainmentFamilyFashionFoodGamesGenderHealthHolidaysHomeHubPagesPersonal FinancePetsPoliticsReligionSportsTechnologyTravel
  • »
  • Politics and Social Issues»
  • Middle East Political & Social Issues

Good or Bad: The Nuclear Agreement with Iran?

Updated on July 19, 2015

In a perfect world, the population of Iran (most were born after 1979) would get their nerve together and topple the current regime of anti-American haters. The regime members are old men with old hatreds of what happened in Iran way back in the 1950's. How the CIA assisted in a coup that toppled a democratically elected leader, Mosaddegh, who opposed British control over its oil field. He would nationalize the Iran's oil assets. He called for independence from foreign powers. The British did not want him in power and asked the USA via CIA to help. The coup worked and Shah Reza Pahlavi was reinstated and remained very pro-West for 26 years, until 1979.

This coup developed the hatred of America by the current old men in today's regime. Back then, they were young men and vowed revenge. But, today's Iran is a far different world- 60% of the 75 million who live there are under 35. They are very pro-American or pro-West in their lives, they want to be a friend of the West and America. Iranian people are great people but led by old men who continue to seek revenge and expect the people they govern, to feel the same.Some do but many do not. So, in a perfect world, Mr. Khamenei, it would be great if he died either naturally or not. Khamenei continues to spit vitriol that the agreement changes nothing. He continues to call America arrogant, no doubt, way back in the 1950's or 60's, these deep seated feelings were caused by America's policy. He, personally, hates America so much, he is most arrogant, as well. So, one day, when the old men now in power are dead, a new generation of Iranian leaders will rise, born in the 70's or later, will moderate how Iran will deal with America.

However, in the meantime, the current nuclear deal is a deal that simply buys time for the Middle East. Obama is gambling. He hopes that in 2025-2030, Iran will have changed its mind about nuclear weapons and are just happy to have nuclear energy for its population. He hopes that the leaders currently in power are dead from old age or other means, and new generation, less-hating America, take control and want to be friends. It is a roll of the dice. Nobody can predict the future, so, in a sense, this deal IS a deal that is better than no deal. No deal would mean that Iran continues to get closer to a bomb and the means to deliver it. While the sanctions have crippled Iran's economy, it did not stop their development of getting the bomb. The people of Iran were truly the one's most hurt. Those who were rich or in the regime, did not suffer much because they are the elite. Iran came to negotiate out of fear from its own young population might stir again for another Green Revolution as it did in 2009. It secretly fears an internal coup stemming from the discontent. They know how this can happen.

So, like many things in life, the deal is the best of a bad situation. It is hinged on hopeful changes down the road in Iran's regime, in the Middle East, kicking the "bomb" issue down the road because the region is bad enough now without a nuclear bomb going off. Even if the US Congress vetoes this agreement and it falls apart 100%, Iran will get want it wants most- a nuclear bomb sooner instead of later. The European countries can opt to continue the deal without the USA. They all can continue their trade and lift sanctions. Even if the US Congress rejects this deal, it will go through because it includes Russia, China and Europe, who could care less what the USA does. So, in a sense, a US Congress rejection is meaningless.

By early 2016, Iran will most likely receive $100 billion in oil revenue currently frozen by sanctions. In 2013, ironically, that the US Congress passed the sanctions that finally crippled their economy and these were opposed by President Obama!

I don't have much hope in this agreement. It is better than nothing. Using the military would just make matters worse. It would fail. The agreement makes no mention of North Korea, where there are many Iranian engineers working with them to develop one. The money Iran gets in 2016 could easily procure nuclear bombs from NK and shipped to Iran. Iran can buy a few bombs, just like Saudi Arabia. Technology from NK to build ballistic missiles can also be bought.

Some things in life are inevitable. Iran wants a nuclear bomb and unless they change their mind, they will get it and then the real danger begins. Maybe this fear is false, like when Pakistan got the bomb and missiles to deliver them. I doubt it.


    0 of 8192 characters used
    Post Comment

    • tirelesstraveler profile image

      Judy Specht 2 years ago from California

      The main problem is westerners think and negotiate on a linear plane, Persians think on circular planes. Unless negotiators understand and adjust for those differences the agreement will mean completely different things to each side. Very interesting idea.

    • perrya profile image

      perrya 2 years ago

      This is true. Iran longs to be a superpower in the region and could be. Pakistan is a confusing place, they play both sides for their advantage. Only a new generation of leaders can maybe improve relations.

    • SouradipSinha profile image

      Souradip Sinha 2 years ago from Calcutta

      Time will tell if it was a good agreement or not.

      On a serious note, both the political/religious leaders of Iran and Pakistan are very medieval and hatred-spreading in nature, as opposed to their democratic peace-loving people.