Nuclear Iran—Why the Islamic Republic Is Not the Actor We Think It Is

“As the only Western journalist allowed to enter Iran prior to its presidential elections back in 2017, I followed then-candidate Ebrahim Raisi on the campaign trail. Whatever illusions I had about Iran and its ambitions melted under the sheer brutality of his war rhetoric.”

Speaking from Jerusalem last week, United States Secretary of State Antony Blinken made clear that while the United States remains committed to Israel’s security, it also wishes to revive Iran’s nuclear deal so that the Islamic Republic could be locked into an agreement which, in theory, would contain its nuclear ambitions. In his view, a renegotiated deal constitutes “the best way to put Iran’s program back in the box that it was in but has escaped from since the United States withdrew from the agreement.”

That rationale may hold from a Western perspective, in that the most aligned nations have come to a consensus on how the game ought to be played for all parties to advance in relation to one another. However, Iran does not abide by such rules. I would argue that Iran’s very ideology, the expression of its political will (i.e., imperial nihilism), forever places its center of power outside of the global narrative.

To imagine that Tehran’s mullahs would forfeit their long-standing dream of a nuclear weapon, the very weapon which would grant them power over those they seek to bring under their theocratic influence (so that Persia could be once more) runs contrary to logic. The Islamic Republic’s very slogan ought to give us pause: “Death to Israel, Death to America.”

To offer credence to the promises made by Tehran can be characterized, at best, as foolish and, at worst, suicidal.