The Objective Should Be a Secular and Moderate Iran

The Islamic Republic of Iran has been wounded. And now, something has got to give.

President Trump has a historic opportunity to reverse decades of enmity toward “The Great Satan,” and end the exportation of terrorism to Europe, the United States, and Israel through the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps — known to have provided weapons and training to the defeated Hamas and Hezbollah, and to other proxies in Syria.

Iran has been militarily and politically weakened.  Some of Iran’s Russian and indigenously made air defense systems were destroyed by the Israeli Air Force last June, and later that month, American B-2 aircraft successfully struck and destroyed Iranian nuclear infrastructure in Natanz, Fordo, and Isfahan. Iran’s traditional allies, Russia, China, and North Korea, were observers on the sidelines. Moreover, the Islamist regime is afraid of its own people, having recently killed at least 30,000 demonstrators according to estimates appearing in The Guardian and Time, both quoting local health sources. (RELATED: US–Iran Talks Only Lead to Uncertainty)

Increasing pressure on Iran, in late January, the carrier strike group led by the Nimitz-class USS Abraham Lincoln arrived from the Indian Ocean and is now on station in the Arabian Sea, off the southern coast of Oman. Typically, a strike group comprises a nuclear-powered carrier, an air wing, a Ticonderoga-class cruiser, a squadron of several Arleigh Burke-class destroyers, a nuclear attack submarine, and support ships — in this case, however, the U.S. Naval Institute does not mention a cruiser. On Wednesday, there were reports of a second carrier strike group ordered to prepare to deploy to the region.

Unlike predecessor presidents who did not enforce a red line in Syria over the use of chemical weapons, and who spent many years trying to negotiate with Iran to limit its development of enriched uranium, President Trump has not flinched about the use of force. The exfiltration in early January of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro, said to require over 150 aircraft and about 20 bases, and the destruction of Iranian nuclear sites, demonstrate that the commander in chief will act decisively to support the core security interests of the United States. (RELATED: America SOARs at Night)

Much has been written about various alternatives: a renegotiated nuclear deal to limit development of fissile material and impede Iran’s ballistic missile capability; military strikes on nuclear and missile infrastructure, the leadership of the Revolutionary Guard, the Kharg Island oil terminal, the Bandar Abbas naval base, and other government targets; and regime change. (RELATED: Two Regimes, One Reality)

However, before a course of action can be defined, there must be a well-communicated primary objective — and that objective should be the development of a secular and moderate Iran. Iran was once the West’s gendarme in the Persian Gulf, assuring oil supplies and functioning as a bulwark against Soviet expansionism, while maintaining good relations with Israel before the Iranian Revolution of 1979. Iran has an accomplished scientific establishment, and among the OPEC oil producers, the most diversified industrial economy, with emphasis on the mining and automotive sectors. A secular and moderate Iran could inhibit the spread of Islamist jihad and serve as a stabilizing force in a region seething with well-armed factionalism. Culturally, the affinity of Iran’s intelligentsia for France is well known.

Direct and indirect nuclear negotiations among the United States, Iran, and the International Atomic Energy Agency of Vienna proved to be a colossal waste of time, facetiously evoking the phrase about the definition of insanity, “doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.” Through apparent subterfuge, Iran simply used the negotiations to buy time to enrich nuclear material with U-235 to near weapons grade.

A nuclear deal, implying that Iran is expected to live up to commitments, would also probably mean continuation of the present regime. However, the Trump administration is known to presently want a deal with Iran. If that were the case, it should include more than dismantling of nuclear development and limitations on missiles — an end to adventurism and support of chaos, an end to violent suppression of dissent, and integration with the West should be on the agenda. The Obama administration’s 2015 nuclear accord with Iran had no such linkages and accordingly, was badly flawed — and about three years later, President Trump repudiated it.

The military option would not give much help to the opposition, nor would it necessarily mean a transition in government from theocracy to a genuine republic. It could also result in the ascent of even more anti-Western hardliners in the inner circle of the ayatollahs. Worse, it could result in a wider conflict against the U.S., Europe, and Israel.

Iran’s arsenal of missiles is still formidable, with a recent Israeli estimate of 1,500, down from a CENTCOM figure of 3,000 a few years ago. Iran is believed capable of hitting targets in Europe, and U.S. bases in the Middle East, such as the CENTCOM installation in Qatar and the Fifth Fleet in Bahrain. Iran also has a submarine fleet, mostly in the mini category, with several diesel electric attack subs, along with asymmetric assets such as drones and missile patrol boats that can swarm U.S. warships. Above all, the American public is not mentally prepared for a major conflict with Iran, having seen only spectacularly focused limited operations against Venezuela and Iran, involving no American deaths.

Although it may still take more time, supporting the Iranians to transition to a new government, led by an Iranian face with Iranian fingerprints on it, would be the wisest course. Operation Ajax, in which the U.S. and Great Britain engineered the ouster of Prime Minister Mohammad Mossadegh in 1953, was a source of protracted anti-Western resentment in Iran, as it was an obvious foreign intrusion that installed the Shah of Iran, Mohammad Reza Pahlavi. A U.S.-managed covert action seems logistically difficult and a bad idea.

Iran has a long, proud history extending over 2,500 years to the reign of Cyrus the Great of the Achaemenid Empire in the 6th century B.C. Iran has had its own parliament, the Majlis, since the early 20th century, although it has generally not been the locus of power. Now is the time to support the Iranian people, with assurances of economic aid to rebuild their energy industry, ending sanctions and isolation from the West, once the current regime is ousted. Now is also the time to intensify sanctions against companies and individuals and to encourage moderate elements in the Iranian government and military to act.

READ MORE from Frank Schell:

America’s Robust National Security Strategy

A 50-Year Mortgage Is a Financial Narcotic

The GENIUS Act: Is It Greed or Is It Good?

Frank Schell is a business strategy consultant and former senior vice president of the First National Bank of Chicago. He was a Lecturer at the Harris School of Public Policy, University of Chicago and is a contributor of opinion pieces to various journals.