Iraqi Writer: Nuclear Deal With Iran Will Deepen Its Control Of Region, Gravely Threaten Regional Peace

In a December 19, 2021 article in the London-based daily Al-Arab, Iraqi poet and writer Farouq Yusouf slammed the U.S. policy in the Vienna nuclear talks with Iran. He accused the U.S. of trying to obtain peace "at any cost" while Iran is posing terms aimed at irreversibly consolidating its control over the region. He expressed apprehension that renewing the nuclear agreement with Iran – which is clearly unreliable, as evident from the nuclear archives exposed by Israel – will gravely threaten the stability and peace of the region and subject it to a new kind of imperialism, namely an Iranian occupation.

The original fault, he added, lies with former U.S. president Barack Obama, who rewarded Iran's willingness to sign the nuclear agreement by putting a time-limit on this agreement, which was "a crime against the countries of the region" and led to the consolidation of Iran's control over Syria, Iraq and Lebanon. Renewing this deal, he said, would be "a dangerous game" for America and would bring further countries under the control of Iran.     

Farouq Yusouf (Source: Al-Arab, London)

The following are translated excerpts from his article: [1]

"The U.S. is eager for the talks in Vienna to succeed at any cost, whereas Iran also wants them to succeed, but not at any cost. Iran wants them to succeed on its own terms, which will be to its advantage… It wants to make sure that the West, led by the U.S., will not only ignore its plan of regional expansion but will actually help it to establish [this expansion] as an irreversible political reality. If this happens, Iran will cross all the red lines [in terms of threatening] regional peace and security and strive to consolidate its direct intervention in all the interests of the Gulf states and of Israel, and through them also in the interests of the U.S. – [the country] that put aside the issue of Iran's attack on the Saudi oil facilities, which has yet to be discussed in the Security Council, [although] many assessed it would not do so. [As a matter of fact,] there are quite a few Iranian issues that remain open. Is it possible to just ignore them and sign an agreement that Iran will be able to violate at any moment, due to the feebleness of its clauses?      

"I don't understand how Europe and the U.S. can trust Iran after, in the negotiations leading up to the 2015 agreement, they directly encountered Iran's ability to lie, deceive and twist the facts. Former [Iranian] foreign minister Mohammad Javad Zarif excelled at this. Moreover, they can figure out the truth, part of which was exposed by [former Israeli prime minister] Binyamin Netanyahu when he announced the interception of the Iranian nuclear documents, whose scandalous [character] apparently failed to make a sufficient impression on the U.S. The information exposed by Netanyahu was not new to the relevant security circles in the U.S., [although] Europe may not have known much [about them]. But the paltry [demands] the American circles intend to make [in the nuclear agreement] may expose the region to grave danger and threaten its peace and security. The U.S. is therefore playing a dangerous game whose consequences will be difficult for it to tolerate.       

"[Former U.S.] president Obama rewarded Iran for [its willingness to] sign the [2015] nuclear agreement by placing a time limit on [this agreement] – and this was a crime against the countries of the region. One of the first consequences of this crime was that Iran tightened its control over Iraq, Lebanon and Yemen, and established itself comfortably in Syria, so much so that, if [Syrian President Bashar] Al-Assad himself wanted to oust it, he would have been unable to do so. Iran took control of [Syrian] territory, first of all by buying it[2] and then by defending it by the force of arms, with the help of Hizbullah and the Iraqi and Afghan militias. 

"After the 2015 agreement Iran openly became an occupying force which breathed new life into the dead body of imperialism. Will the new agreement cement the consequences of that imperialism and establish it as a political fact? The Western conduct we have seen does not bode well. In Syria, Iran's behavior became part of the Russian approach in Astana;[3] in Yemen, the international envoy does not hide the fact that he has met with the Iranians because they are a side [in the conflict there]; and Iraq and Lebanon will remain on political hold until Iran's [Islamic] Revolutionary Guards [Corps] decides to activate the [political] apparatus that is operated from outside the country. That is what we know. One does not have to be a political expert [to understand it]. The simple folks on the street know that Iran's presence necessarily means political chaos that destroys countries and causes their currency to collapse vis-à-vis the dollar. That is what happened and is still happening in Yemen, Iraq, Syria and Lebanon.

"What we know is less than one percent of what the U.S. knows, and that is why some of the Israeli statements on Iran seem [to us] somewhat delusional and nonsensical. The Israelis do not believe that the American collusion with Iran will come to the point of ignoring facts that could cause the region to explode.

"Iran is disgracing Israel with its flirtation in Vienna, which so far seems to be accepted by the other side [i.e., the West and the U.S.], despite their hesitant objection to complying with Iran's demand that the sanctions be removed before it signs [the agreement].  Israel's threats may be part of subtle American pressure that Israel is expressing more bluntly. This means that Israel's security will definitely be ensured. But is that enough? Some countries are already controlled by Iran and others are in danger of being controlled by Iran thanks to the nuclear agreement. Israel's military thinking has never been so foolish as to allow for Iran's deceptive terminology, and that is a factor that may impact the Vienna talks."