Iran's rapid move toward acquiring nuclear weapons, its pledge to keep supporting destabilizing proxies in the region, and its harsh treatment of the Iranian people have unleashed speculation about how to manage these challenges, as stated by writer Farhad Rezaei in his story "Diplomacy or Regime Change".
Some hope that with the Islamic Republic weakened, the United States can help the Iranian people change their form of government. Others argue that the US should refrain from pursuing regime change in Iran because it is unachievable. I would disagree with both.
Rezaei spoke of the diplomatic path: "Instead, they believe that the United States should focus on changing the regime's behavior through diplomacy. According to these analysts, diplomacy would not just persuade Iran to give up its nuclear ambitions, it might also lead to a grand bargain in which the regime renounces military support for terrorist groups, like Hezbollah, Hamas and the Houthis. This latter argument is troublesome on different levels. First, these observers seem to forget that two decades of diplomacy with the Islamic Republic have failed to persuade it to end its nuclear weapons program. Instead, the regime has deliberately adopted a 'talk for talk's sake' approach to stall and drag out the process until it achieves a nuclear breakout -- a threshold it is now on the verge of crossing." I think that any agreement that would limit Iran's nuclear arsenal, like the one under former President Barack Obama, would be a positive. However, as Rezaei points out, the nature of Iran's government might make another deal a tough sell.
The Islamic Republic has made progress in its nuclear weapons program. It's not far away from having sufficient uranium to build multiple nuclear warheads, and the leaders of the Islamic Republic have begun openly hinting at a shift in Iran's nuclear doctrine. In addition, Iran has accelerated the production and operation of centrifuges to enrich uranium at higher levels, thereby creating the type of fuel used for nuclear bombs. According to the latest assessment by the International Atomic Energy Agency, as of Oct. 26, Iran's stockpile of uranium enriched up to 60 percent purity had reached 182.3 kilograms. If this stockpile is further enriched to 90 percent, it will be enough to make up to five nuclear warheads, as said by Rezaei.
The regime has restricted the United Nation's ability to monitor key facilities, limiting both technological and physical inspections. This means the International Atomic Energy Agency can no longer reliably detect whether Iran is diverting nuclear material, equipment, or other resources to undeclared sites, further complicating verification.
The proliferation of nuclear weapons in Iran poses profound implications for US security. A solution is required to address this escalating threat. Diplomacy with the regime will never lead to a grand bargain, one in which the regime renounces its military support for terror proxies such as Hamas, Hezbollah, Islamic Jihad, the Houthis, and various Shia militias. Iran's support for these proxies is not merely tactical; it is central to its revolutionary identity and its opposition to Israel, Saudi Arabia, and the US. Abandoning this support would necessitate a fundamental shift from a revolutionary cause to a normal state - achievable only through pressure from the US.
The Islamic Republic views regional instability as essential for maintaining its influence, and it does this by funding, training, and arming groups. However, the regime faces multiple crises at home and is on the brink of collapse.
A new, democratic Iran would not be allied to the China-Russia orbit or support terrorist proxies. We've seen glimmers of this new Iran in the recent mass demonstrations over a woman incorrectly wearing a hijab. The US should support these democratic tendencies, something the second Donald Trump administration might not do.
A new democratic Iran would also be a productive partner in arms control. Having one less nuclear power would come closer to securing peace in the world. Is there a definite map for a democratic Iran? No, and our country's experience in Iraq should tell us that we can't achieve a new Iran through military means. However, we can work toward our goal incrementally via diplomacy and soft power. Soft power is tied to foreign aid, and the Trump Administration is currently attacking foreign aid. Let us start a democratic opposition to the destructive tendencies in American politics that will keep us from effectively using soft power. Eventually, a new Iran could emerge.
Jason Sibert is the Lead Writer of the Peace Economy Project
Post Article Comment and Rate This Article
