We must stop conceding to the Iranian Regime’s every demand and start imposing sanctions, according to a noted human rights activist and Iran expert.

Heshmat Alavi wrote an op-ed for The Federalist in which he points out that not only has the nuclear deal failed but we should never have expected anything else, because as the Regime has shown time and time again, they will never change their behaviour through diplomacy.

He wrote: “Some argue the JCPOA has successfully slowed Iran’s dangerous drive to obtain nuclear weapons…Yet with limited restrictions imposed on Tehran’s overall nuclear program, international inspectors are not enjoying the access they should to Iran’s controversial facilities. The Obama administration made many promises about the nuclear deal, which we have yet to see materialize. This includes “anytime, anywhere” inspections that have now morphed into a complicated process of practically requesting permission from Iran.”

He highlights that appeasement of a terrorist regime intent on regional domination is not only counterintuitive to national (and international) security, it has also never worked.

He notes that British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain tried to appease the Nazis in the build-up to WW2 and that Bill Clinton tried to appease North Korea in the 90s and, as everyone knows, that didn’t work.

Alavi wrote: “Do we seek to trek down the same path with Iran, a state with dangerous influence across the already flashpoint Middle East? One such horrible example is Iran’s involvement in Syria.”

He continued: “Some think Iran lacks the necessary will and understands all too well how such a move would spark drastic international measures against its interests. JCPOA advocates (read Iranian apologists) have also delegitimized any concern about Tehran’s intentions by claiming pact violations, such as breaching limits set on heavy water—the substance needed for plutonium-based nuclear bombs—as mere “bumps in the road.” This shows those making such arguments either lack the necessary knowledge of Iran’s belligerent nature in the past four decades, or simply fall into the category of Iran lobbyists. Fierce international sanctions left Iran no choice but to succumb to nuclear talks with knees bleeding. More non-nuclear sanctions are needed to make Tehran understand the international community means business.”

So what are the alternatives to continuing with the nuclear deal?

There are many ways to deal with the Iranian Regime aside from the nuclear and Alavai highlights three important ones:

• Making international companies reluctant to invest by leaving its position on the deal open to interpretation.

• Impose new non-nuclear sanctions on Iran for ballistic missile advances, supporting terrorism, meddling in states across the Middle East, and domestic human rights violations to name a few.

• Seeking the support of US allies in Europe to reimpose nuclear sanctions based on Iran’s breach of the deal.

Source » ncr-iran