Americans don’t necessarily have to be directly affected by a major international news event to understand its relevance to their lives. Anyone who lived through the turmoil of Iran’s revolution in 1978, the ransacking of the U.S. Embassy in Tehran
Americans don’t necessarily have to be directly affected by a major international news event to understand its relevance to their lives. Anyone who lived through the turmoil of Iran’s revolution in 1978, the ransacking of the U.S. Embassy in Tehran and the 444-day captivity of more than 60 American hostages should grasp the notion that we ignore international events at our peril.
The prospect has loomed for years that Iran was getting close to building its own nuclear weapons, a scenario Israel and Saudi Arabia viewed as a threat to their very existence. At the very least, it would portend decades of unprecedented regional instability.
With that in mind, President Barack Obama authorized a dual program of harsh international trade and banking sanctions against Iran along with negotiations to sharply curtail Iran’s nuclear ambitions.
The weekend yielded major dividends on those efforts with the release of five American prisoners in exchange for seven Iranians. Without the relationships built during the past 14 months of patient talks — discussions that put limits on Iran’s nuclear program in exchange for the lessening of sanctions — that sort of exchange could not have happened.
Obama has endured years of harsh criticism.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu excoriated the Iran negotiations in a rare speech to a joint session of Congress. Domestic critics warned that U.S.-led international sanctions would have no effect on Tehran.
The critics were wrong.
That said, Iran’s penchant for mischief-making remains.
It still supports an insurgency that immersed Yemen in civil war. Iranian-backed Hezbollah militiamen continue helping prop up Bashar Assad’s bloody dictatorship in Syria — contributing mightily to the refugee deluge that has caused political upheaval across Europe. And the nuclear deal, at best, only postpones rather than eliminates Iran’s bomb-making capability.
As we know from the North Korean example, landmark nuclear-arms accords can fall apart. Whereas North Korea has remained insular and distrustful of the outside world, Iran badly wants to re-engage economically and bolster its status as a regional power.
To ensure the Iran deal doesn’t sour as did the non-proliferation treaty negotiated with North Korea in 1994, international diplomacy with Iran must be sustained, regardless of who occupies the White House next year.
So, why should you care?
For one, it could affect your pocketbook.
Iran is about to resume international oil exports under this deal, which means the price you pay at the pump is likely to continue plummeting. The opposite effect likely would occur if U.S.-Iranian relations deteriorate again.
The presidential campaign already includes lots of debate about Iran. Conservative candidates are pledging to scrap this deal and return America to its previous, confrontational posture.
We know from the past decades of war in Iraq and Afghanistan exactly how costly military confrontation can be. In the absence of diplomacy, the prospect of war with Iran can only grow.
This is where your vote — your informed vote — can make a big difference in what happens next with Iran.
— St. Louis Post-Dispatch
