Mnar Muhawesh: Opposition to Iran Deal as Much About US Economic Dominance

Last week, President Barack Obama put into effect the controversial deal between the P5+1 nations and Iran supposedly designed to curb the Islamic Republic’s nuclear program. The deal has seen a great deal of criticism inside and outside the US.

US agreement to the deal sparked outrage among its critics who claim the deal will eventually lead to a nuclear armed Iran that threatens stability in the Middle East, fuels terrorism, and commits to the destruction of Israel.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu took to Congress in March and warned, “The foremost sponsor of global terrorism could be weeks away from having enough enriched uranium for an entire arsenal of nuclear weapons and this with full international legitimacy … And by the way, Iran’s intercontinental ballistic missile program is not part of the deal … Iran could have the means to deliver that nuclear arsenal to the far-reach corners of the earth, including to every part of the United States.”

The prime minister also noted the restrictions on Iran’s nuclear program as outlined in the deal would be lifted in about a decade.

Supporters of the deal, however, argue it serves to scale back Iran’s nuclear program –particularly its capacity to build weapons- in exchange for much-needed economic relief.

Mint Press News editor-in-chief Mnar Muhawesh outlined this view in a recent article.

She notes the deal, at least in writing, expands UN inspectors’ access to more of Iran’s nuclear facilities than that which is outlined in the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty to which Iran is a signatory of. She also notes the deal calls for Iran to reduce the number of its centrifuges enriching uranium by half, and to repurpose heavy-water reactors to not produce weapons-grade plutonium.

As a result, the West agrees to lift sanctions which Muhawesh says would bring Iran closer to the “medical, food and banking industries” after facing nearly 40 years of sanctions.

Muhawesh argues economic renewal is Iran’s main goal and even goes as far as to say Iran does not intend to grow a nuclear arsenal.  She cites spy cables leaked to the Guardian this year suggesting the Mossad and CIA delivered at least one communication among each other in which they agreed Iran is “not performing the activity necessary to produce weapons.” 

In fact, Muhawesh believes that leaders truly oppose the nuclear deal not out of doomsday fears, but out of fear that easing sanctions on Iran will lead to an economically mighty Islamic Republic that would challenge the status-quo in the Middle East—where the major players are more-or-less U.S. allies, especially economically.

One of these is Saudi Arabia, an oil-supplying power house to the world.

Iran also has oil, but sanctions on imports and exports forced it to produce its own supplies for itself.

“This had the unexpected effect of turning the country into a major auto and defense manufacturer, competing with countries like China and even the United States,” writes Muhawesh.

She also states that sanctions led to lack of jobs forcing young professionals – which she says make up one of the greater Middle East’s most highly educated and modernized societies- to leave the country.

“Without sanctions holding it back, Iran threatens the major regional superpower status quo. It could very well spark a shake-up in the current power structure in the Middle East, leaving Israel and its ally Saudi Arabia out in the cold,” writes Muhawesh.