Iran’s nuclear pitch meets reality: Former Foreign Minister Zarif’s old playbook in a new era

Mohammad Javad Zarif, the former Iranian Foreign Minister, wrote an article in Foreign Affairs in which he sought to present himself as a patriotic Iranian, loyal to the current regime and intent on saving his country from the war targeting it. He opens the article by asserting that “Iran is winning the war.” Zarif then turns to the “resilience” of the Iranian people, setting the stage for proposing specific suggestions to bring the war to an end.

Mohammad Javad Zarif focuses on the Iranian nuclear issue, offering practical solutions that signal Iran’s readiness to provide all possible guarantees regarding nuclear weapons and to reopen the Strait of Hormuz. In return, he calls for the lifting of “all” sanctions on Iran, particularly those imposed by the United States. Zarif also hints at the possibility of American companies resuming operations in Iran and of cooperation with the United States “to the benefit of both peoples.”

It seems that Mohammad Javad Zarif is living in a different world, disconnected from the ongoing war—the world of the Barack Obama era, when the “Islamic Republic” reached an agreement on its nuclear file under the auspices of the United Nations Security Council’s permanent members, along with Germany.

Iran's issue with the world

The former Iranian foreign minister, who negotiated the nuclear file with his American counterpart John Kerry, does not appear to recognize that the current American administration is different, and that any agreement with it seems unlikely in the absence of the war’s broader dimensions. Chief among these is that Iran’s problem is with the world—particularly neighboring countries that have been subjected to repeated attacks by the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps. Most importantly, Zarif seems to completely overlook Iran’s ballistic missiles and their launch platforms, as well as its regional arms, which are directly affiliated with the “Revolutionary Guard.”

Like the former American president, Mohammad Javad Zarif reduces the region’s crises to the Iranian nuclear file that he seeks to resell. He overlooks the fact that the region has fundamentally changed in the wake of the Gaza war, and that Iran has lost all the wars it initiated after it, believing it would benefit from that conflict. The “goods” the former Iranian foreign minister is promoting are no longer marketable, especially following Iran’s exit from Syria and the defeat inflicted on Hezbollah in Lebanon.

The question: Is Iran a normal state or not?

The answer is that the “Islamic Republic” regime is of a kind whose expiration date has passed. The regime’s time has run out, along with that of the American nuclear file, which must be concluded without any conditions. This is something Mohammad Javad Zarif and others refuse to grasp, owing to a mindset rooted in the era of Barack Obama.

Late last year, at a conference held in Doha, Mohammad Javad Zarif criticized the groups that Iran had supported. He did so on the grounds that these groups, such as Hezbollah and Hamas, for example, had done nothing to support the “Islamic Republic.”

Naturally, Mohammad Javad Zarif can be asked where the Palestinian cause stands in light of Iran’s support for it. Where does Lebanon stand after Iranian efforts that turned Hezbollah into the state itself, reducing the Lebanese state to a mini-state within the party’s structure? Where does Lebanon stand after Iran came to control the country’s decisions of war and peace and opened the southern front under the pretext of “supporting Gaza”? And where do Lebanese Shiites stand in light of the desire for revenge following the assassination of Ali Khamenei?

Certainly, the results of Iranian policy based on the use of proxies—such as Hamas, Hezbollah, the Houthis, or Iraqi militias operating under the banner of the Popular Mobilization Forces—have become clear. These tools have fulfilled their intended role in fragmenting the social fabric in Gaza, Lebanon, Yemen, and Iraq.

Syria now holds some hope for a better future for one reason: Iran’s irreversible departure from it. While the situation in Syria remains unstable, it is nonetheless true that the country has, to an extent, returned to the Syrians and is no longer merely an Iranian outpost, as was the case before Bashar al-Assad fled to Moscow.

Mohammad Javad Zarif suffers from being accused inside Iran of appeasing America. He should take pride in that instead of trying to appease extremists within the country. He ought to have the courage to admit that he does not need to prove his patriotism by boasting that he is under American sanctions.

Some honesty with oneself is necessary at this stage. More important than honesty is refraining from promoting expired goods. There is no future for Iran as long as the “Islamic Republic” regime exists, and it is impossible to separate the nuclear file on the one hand from ballistic missiles and their launch platforms and the fate of Iran’s weapons on the other.

Disclaimer: The opinions expressed by the writers are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of Annahar.