The futility of continuing sanctions on Iran

Conservative political commentators in the US are advocating tighter economic sanctions on Iran in order to isolate the country and weaken its nuclear capabilities. They are worried that the current interim agreement with Iran will offend close allies, such as Saudi Arabia. In their eyes, Iran will constantly remain a looming threat since it allegedly funds terrorist groups, harbours anti-American sentiment and destabilises regimes in Yemen and Morocco. Tough economic sanctions, however, do not only impact Iran’s regime. Regular civilians are bearing the brunt of sanctions that are currently in place. The logic behind increasing economic sanctions against Iran is also questionable. Certain factions in the US that view Saudi Arabia as a valuable ally are either strategically patient or shockingly oblivious to the political power games unfolding around them. It is possible to explore these glaring irregularities point by point.

In 2013, a magazine called Jadaliyya published personal accounts of civilians in Iran who are crumbling underneath the weight of stifling economic sanctions. I came across the story of a 32-year-old female who was suddenly out of a job. The factory she worked at shut down due to harsh economic sanctions against Iran’s banks and imports. Her experience sheds light on how the current economic sanctions are already making day-to-day activities in Iran unaffordable and extremely difficult. Sanctions are not merely targeting a menacing entity. They are hurting people who have no evident involvement with the development of Iran’s nuclear enrichment levels. Whether or not Iran has the right to protect itself by developing a nuclear programme is another argument altogether. Let’s just focus on the fact that tougher economic sanctions will not necessarily hinder Iran’s nuclear development programme. In fact, an opposite reaction may occur.

Nancy Soderberg, a former deputy national security adviser for the US and the UN, and John Bradshaw, executive director of the National Security Network, have written that Iranian hardliners will take advantage of increased sanctions by inciting national fervour against the US. Both national security experts added that hardliners would encourage the development of a nuclear programme by treating it as an act of defiance. They further emphasised that wide scale anti-US propaganda will create feelings of distrust and resentment, therefore, decreasing opportunities to reach any agreement regarding Iran’s nuclear issue. Around 205 members of Iran’s parliament will reportedly allow the government to intensify nuclear enrichment levels if new sanctions are imposed.

Finally, accusing Iran of funding terrorist groups, while voicing concerns about offending Saudi Arabia is actually laughable. According to an independent research and media organisation called, the Centre for Research on Globalization, Saudi Arabia has allegedly been financing extremist militant groups in Pakistan. In 2010, a Wikileaks cable released a statement Hillary Clinton made about Saudi Arabia’s role as the world’s largest source of funds for extremist militant groups, such as the Afghan Taliban and the Lashkar-e-Taiba. There is reportedly no evidence that the Saudi government is financially supporting the Islamic State. Saudi citizens, however, have been accused of sending private donations to the militant organisation.

My message to those who support increased economic sanctions on Iran is this: do not promote strict policies that harm innocent civilians and provoke unnecessary tension, especially if diplomatic proceedings are already in place. It is also not fair to condemn Iran as a threatening entity while turning a blind eye to elements in Saudi Arabia that have a suspicious track record when it comes to funding terrorist groups.

Published in The Express Tribune, March  4^th,  2015.

Like Opinion & Editorial on Facebook, follow @ETOpEd on Twitter to receive all updates on all our daily pieces.