Washington and Iran's Domestic Crisis; A Note from Reza Taghizadeh

Donald Trump's Twitter messages in response to the protests in Iran, which began on Friday, December 29, with the warning 'the world is watching,' culminated on Tuesday, January 3, with the declaration 'the United States is watching.' This reflects unwavering and direct support for the Iranian people's protests against the religious government and outlines Washington's foreign policy regarding the internal crisis and the future of the Islamic Republic. In his speech at the United Nations General Assembly last September, Trump labeled Iran's religious government as 'criminal' and called for its change. On the last day of the past Christian year, the U.S. President reiterated the topic of 'regime change' in Iran, stating, 'The great people of Iran have been under pressure for years... it is time for change.' The effective use of 'Twitter diplomacy' is not an exclusive initiative of Donald Trump. This tool has previously been used to promote U.S. foreign policy goals, but its application has changed under the Trump administration. On January 12, 2016, close to the announcement of the implementation of the nuclear agreement between Iran and the 1+5 group, two U.S. Navy boats strayed from their course in the Persian Gulf and were detained by the Revolutionary Guards' patrol boats, along with ten crew members, and taken to Farsi Island (belonging to Iran). The support of the U.S. government and officials for the internal protesters of the Iranian government does not prepare for the United States to enter a hot war or military confrontation. Instead, a broad cold war aimed at eroding the religious government has been employed, and it can be expected that this method of confrontation will continue at new levels in the future. John Kerry, the then U.S. Secretary of State, tweeted to Javad Zarif an hour after the incident: 'A peaceful and effective resolution to this issue will be a testament to the decisive role of diplomacy in maintaining the security and power of our countries.' Javad Zarif responded to Kerry: 'I am glad that dialogue and mutual respect, rather than threats and resorting to violence, led to the resolution of the sailors' issue. Let us learn from this example.' The American sailors returned to their base 24 hours later. In contrast to the previous U.S. administration's use of Twitter diplomacy, the Trump administration uses this tool to counter the behaviors and policies of non-aligned countries. Regarding the unrest in Iran, Trump tweeted at 4 a.m. on January 2: 'The people of Iran finally stood up against the brutal and corrupt regime of Iran. All the money that Obama foolishly gave them went to terrorism and into their pockets...' Mike Pence, the U.S. Vice President, took parallel action to further reflect Washington's positions on Twitter, emphasizing: 'As long as Trump is President and I am Vice President, the United States will not repeat past mistakes when the people rose up and we ignored the heroic resistance of the Iranian people against their violent regime.' Pence tweeted on January 1: 'The brave resistance of the Iranian people is a source of hope and belief for all who fight for freedom and against dictatorship. We must not and certainly will not disappoint them.' A review of recent messages from Trump administration officials regarding Iran, including Nikki Haley, the U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations, outlines the roadmap of the U.S. government's foreign policy towards the Tehran regime, indicating that Washington has employed the most effective tools of the cold war against the Islamic Republic instead of adopting previous conciliatory behaviors. By reviewing the Twitter messages of U.S. officials, one can somewhat anticipate Washington's future behaviors regarding the most important issues related to Iran, including the July 2015 nuclear agreement. The Trump administration opposes the 'nuclear agreement.' Therefore, it can be expected that step by step, the policies of the previous U.S. administration in this regard will change, agreements will be suspended, and the facilities and benefits offered to the Iranian government in exchange for the agreement will be cut off. Undoubtedly, money is an important source of power and also a means that can be converted into other levers of power. In contrast to the previous U.S. administration's policy, which generously provided this power to the Islamic government through the suspension of sanctions, the Trump administration has adopted a policy to limit Tehran's access to this lever with the aim of weakening it. The media war with the Islamic Republic and the widespread amplification of dissenting voices, in which Trump's 'Twitter diplomacy' plays a prominent role, has put the Iranian government in a difficult defensive position. Due to the repetition of U.S. officials' tweets in mainstream media, television, radio, and websites worldwide, the nature of Iran's authoritarian government has come under close scrutiny by global public opinion. U.S. consultations with European and non-European countries to create alignment with White House policies represent another front that the Trump administration has opened against the Islamic government of Iran. Pursuing human rights issues and standing alongside the freedom-seeking demands of the people, as well as referring related cases to international organizations, including a request for an extraordinary Security Council meeting to condemn violence against dissenters in Iran, is another way to exert pressure on its regime. If in the 1990s during Bill Clinton's administration, the routes of gas and oil pipelines in the Caspian region and during the early 21st century under Barack Obama's administration, the course of nuclear negotiations and the related agreement shaped U.S. foreign policy towards the Islamic Republic, today 'open diplomacy' and Trump's tweets narrate the roadmap and policies that the White House has adopted regarding Iran's governance.