What if Iran agrees to the demands of the current US administration? What if Iran calls off its nuclear program, dismantles its ballistic missiles’ arsenal, and stops interfering in neighboring countries by discontinuing the military, logistic and economic support for its proxy militias in Lebanon, Syria, and Yemen? What if Iran tones down its rhetoric against Saudi and the UAE, and treats Iraq and Lebanon as independent states and not as vassals? What if Iran engages in a détente with the West, the Sunni world, and the Persian Gulf nations by embarking on a greater cooperation and integration in economic fields , starting with a coordinated action with the Saudis within OPEC?

In exchange, Iran would have its full diplomatic relations restored with the US, all trade sanctions lifted, a full restitution of any funds blocked in the US, EU or elsewhere and the chance for it to rejoin the family of nations. Foreign direct investments would flow in, and the reconstruction of the Iranian economy -from the energy to the telecom sector- could become the largest bonanza in emerging markets’ recent history. Iranians are fluent in English and some are in French. They are netizens and well versed into social media networking. They have home-grown technical capabilities and high educational standards, and they -above all- have the hunger and the drive to close the development gap that has eluded them under the regime of the Mullahs for over 50 years!

The greatest benefit of such approach would be to the citizens of Iran who have suffered under a repressive regime, lost lives in the futile Iran-Iraq war, and got entangled in insurgencies in Iraq, Syria, Lebanon and Yemen. No great prestige or rewards were recouped from such foreign excursions and no lasting gratitude has been built with the neighboring populations except for a minority of Shia militant groups. Those who aligned themselves with the interests of Iran against the larger interests of their own nations. But these are, surprisingly, few groups. They do not represent the silent majority of Shia who, like everyone else, have witnessed and experienced the havoc that a relation with revolutionary Iran has brought onto their daily lives. Iraq suffered more humiliation and negative outcomes under Iranian influence than under US military presence. Today it is a sectarian society, with parallel armies running amuck, and its landscape is partitioned into de facto zones of influence between Shias, Sunnis and Kurds. Lebanon has -and one hates to admit- fared better under the Syrian occupation than under the Iranian dominance where only one Party of God rules over all other creatures of that same God. Yemen was relatively quieter -albeit not more democratic or prosperous- under Ali Abdallah Saleh than under the Houthis. The examples of Iranian revolutionaries’ plundering abound, but none are more vivid and poignant than what they have done at home.

The Mullahs and their cronies, and the Revolutionary Guards’ Corps and their proxies would lose everything in such a bargain. They have nothing to offer for future generations except more repression, a sea of tears, and economic disaster. So, they are in dire need of a Big Bad Wolf to rally the ‘oppressed’ and ‘destitute’ masses against it. They have found it since 1978 in the form of the US administration, and they will continue to cling on to it as if their lives depended thereupon. Without it, they would be exposed, and accountable to an angry population that would trade the government’s hard rhetoric for investors’ hard currency any day of the week and twice on Friday.

There is an Iranian saying that translates into :”Do not use words that are too big for your mouth”.

‘What if’ has just gained a new dimension in Persia.

What if Iran agrees to the demands of the current US administration? What if Iran calls off its nuclear program, dismantles its ballistic missiles’ arsenal, and stops interfering in neighboring countries by discontinuing the military, logistic and economic support for its proxy militias in Lebanon, Syria, and Yemen? What if Iran tones down its rhetoric against Saudi and the UAE, and treats Iraq and Lebanon as independent states and not as vassals? What if Iran engages in a détente with the West, the Sunni world, and the Persian Gulf nations by embarking on a greater cooperation and integration in economic fields , starting with a coordinated action with the Saudis within OPEC?


In exchange, Iran would have its full diplomatic relations restored with the US, all trade sanctions lifted, a full restitution of any funds blocked in the US, EU or elsewhere and the chance for it to rejoin the family of nations. Foreign direct investments would flow in, and the reconstruction of the Iranian economy -from the energy to the telecom sector- could become the largest bonanza in emerging markets’ recent history. Iranians are fluent in English and some are in French. They are netizens and well versed into social media networking. They have home-grown technical capabilities and high educational standards, and they -above all- have the hunger and the drive to close the development gap that has eluded them under the regime of the Mullahs for over 50 years!


The greatest benefit of such approach would be to the citizens of Iran who have suffered under a repressive regime, lost lives in the futile Iran-Iraq war, and got entangled in insurgencies in Iraq, Syria, Lebanon and Yemen. No great prestige or rewards were recouped from such foreign excursions and no lasting gratitude has been built with the neighboring populations except for a minority of Shia militant groups. Those who aligned themselves with the interests of Iran against the larger interests of their own nations. But these are, surprisingly, few groups. They do not represent the silent majority of Shia who, like everyone else, have witnessed and experienced the havoc that a relation with revolutionary Iran has brought onto their daily lives. Iraq suffered more humiliation and negative outcomes under Iranian influence than under US military presence. Today it is a sectarian society, with parallel armies running amuck, and its landscape is partitioned into de facto zones of influence between Shias, Sunnis and Kurds. Lebanon has -and one hates to admit- fared better under the Syrian occupation than under the Iranian dominance where only one Party of God rules over all other creatures of that same God. Yemen was relatively quieter -albeit not more democratic or prosperous- under Ali Abdallah Saleh than under the Houthis. The examples of Iranian revolutionaries’ plundering abound, but none are more vivid and poignant than what they have done at home.


The Mullahs and their cronies, and the Revolutionary Guards’ Corps and their proxies would lose everything in such a bargain. They have nothing to offer for future generations except more repression, a sea of tears, and economic disaster. So, they are in dire need of a Big Bad Wolf to rally the ‘oppressed’ and ‘destitute’ masses against it. They have found it since 1978 in the form of the US administration, and they will continue to cling on to it as if their lives depended thereupon. Without it, they would be exposed, and accountable to an angry population that would trade the government’s hard rhetoric for investors’ hard currency any day of the week and twice on Friday.


There is an Iranian saying that translates into :”Do not use words that are too big for your mouth”.


‘What if’ has just gained a new dimension in Persia.