Middle-east Arab News Opinion | Asharq Al-awsat

Opinion:Did Washington Turn Against Tehran? | ASHARQ AL-AWSAT English Archive 2005 -2017
Select Page
Media ID: 55345899

You never know who to believe and what to believe from the official statements issued from Washington about facing ISIS, the Syrian Regime and Iran.

Yet, I can tell that I have found a different announcement given by an American official, which is new in content, yet cannot be counted on.
A US treasury official, speaking at a Chatham House forum in the United Kingdom, talked about dealing with Iran saying that the USA has found out that Iran, even without nuclear power, poses a threat to Europe and the world. He clearly said that Iran leads countries funding terrorism globally. It is the main supporter for Hezbollah, it supplies the extremists in Yemen with weapons, and it is the one enabling Assad’s regime to cause destruction and violence in Syria.
The official said that the US Government decided to differentiate between lifting the boycott on Iran, which it deserved after signing the nuclear program agreement with the West, but it will maintain boycotting it and prosecuting its members, companies, and all those who cooperate with it’s terrorist part. In short, he believes that there is no use from reforming Iran’s behavior, and it is what US has been saying from the beginning.
Iran’s regime represents a threat not only to its citizens or the people of the Middle East, and is the main reason behind terrorism and chaos.
Because the US Treasury is considered to be one of the most important departments and executive government corporations, the statement issued is assumed to be an important modification, if not a complete retreat, of the American policy on Iran.
If the censorship policy over the Iranian financial transactions was implemented, and a new page of sanctions was opened against the international companies dealing with Iran over forbidden topics such as Syria and Yemen, whether in the arms trade, security monitoring, or sanctions on individuals and the reintroduction of theblacklists, then it would mark a crucial development. 
Such actions taken by USA can affect Iranian behavior in the region and the world. At the same time, theyoutweigh the moderates who prevail within Iran itself, who lost because of full openness by Washington as a reward for signing the cessation of military nuclear project. This openness boosted the fanatics’ influence in the regime and weakened the moderates including President Hassan Rouhani, who established the agreement from the Iranian side.
Washington’s economic weapon is so tough and might exceed its direct military participation, especially when it practices censorship, prosecution, and the blockage of the financial transactions that are not directly related to USA itself except by the dollar currency; as well as when it put restrictions on trade deals, to threat brokers and arms sellers with the black lists.
All this depends on the honesty of what has been stated that Washington has finally found out that Iran did not let go of its policy supporting terrorism that is threatening the world. Americans used to think that lifting sanctions over Iran would lead to moderation policy, yet it led to more wars in the region, and the money it received from lifting sanctions were spent on arms deals with Russia.