Here’s The Real Reason Why Some Americans Hate Iran Nuclear Deal

Originally published by

The nuclear deal with Iran is a good thing. President Obama deserves credit for initiating the dialogue and for negotiations that led to terms to which both sides can agree. As Winston Churchill said but too few Americans believe:

“To jaw-jaw is always better than to war-war.”

So why are there still so many high-profile opponents to this agreement, which provides for an inspections regime to enforce Iran’s promise not to develop a nuclear weapons program in exchange for lifting international economic sanctions against the Islamic Republic?

According to the vast majority of writers and broadcasters working for corporate media, the opposition is ideological.

Saudi Arabia, they say, is afraid that Shiite Iran will violate the agreement in order to become the second nuclear state in the Middle East, after Israel, and might threaten to use it against them or one of their Sunni allies. Both Saudi Arabia and Israel, by this way of thinking, are also worried that Iran might increase its support of terrorist organizations as its economy improves.

Since President Obama has promised to veto any attempt by the Republican-led Congress to derail the agreement, and it would be difficult for the GOP to muster the two thirds majority necessary to override the president’s veto, resistance is pretty much pro forma.

According to the Republicans, they’re not afraid of peace or jonesing for war against Iran – they just don’t think there’s any way to prevent the Iranians from cheating the inspectors, and in an echo of the classic complaint that a restaurant has terrible food and such small portions, the inspections don’t go far enough into the future.

The media has been playing his usual role as government transcriber, taking GOP officials at their word.

Even Obama has paid lipservice to these concerns, expressing his own complaints about Iran’s “threats” against Israel in his speech announcing the deal.

In fact, the much-ballyhooed statement by former Iranian President Ahmadinejad about wanting to “wipe Israel off the map” has been debunked. He never said that.)

The truth is, opposition to Obama’s nuclear deal with Iran has a lot more to do with business than ideology.

Iran has the fourth-largest proven oil reserves in the world. After all the sanctions are lifted, energy analysts believe that there will be a significant price drop for a barrel of crude worldwide. “The thinks Iran can get back to producing 4 million barrels of oil per day — the level it was at in 2008 — by the end of this decade. Oil Minister Bijan Namdar Zangeneh wants Iran to resume its spot as the world’s No. 2 oil exporter behind Saudi Arabia (a spot currently occupied by Russia). But that’s far from assured, and there could easily be hiccups on the way,” reports Vox.

Oil prices have already been declining. This is been terrible news for Saudi Arabia, the world number-one oil producer, currently responsible for about 10 million barrels per day of production. “A potential return of Iranian oil to the market could not have come at a worse time,” Barclays commodities analyst Michael Cohen says. “An increase in Iranian exports beyond 300,000 to 400,000 barrels a day would be difficult for the market to absorb.” Goldman Sachs agrees. So do commodities markets, which pushed oil futures lower when news of the Iran deal broke.

The only terrorism that the Saudi royal family cares about is a 9/11-style attack on their numbered Swiss bank accounts, which they fear might be the effect of all that new Iranian oil coming online. (Anyway, Saudi Arabia is probably in a better position than just about any other country to put a dent in terrorism if it ever felt like it, since it funds radical Wahhabi-inspired madrasahs and insurgent groups throughout Asia and Africa.)

Here in the United States, opposition to allowing Iran to enjoy full trading relations and diplomatic links with the global community is centered around right-wing Republicans in the House and Senate. As with the Saudis, the real reason that they’re against this deal is that it represents a clear and present danger to big oil.

87% of donations by oil and gas companies and 95% of those from the coal industry to members of Congress go to Republicans. The Republican Party is owned lock, stock and barrel by energy conglomerates, which stand to see their profits shrink as oil prices drop in response to the increasing global production anticipated by the revival of Iran’s oil sector.

So the next time you watch talking heads go on and on about the fear that the crazy mullahs of Tehran want to fire an ICBM into Tel Aviv, remember that this rhetoric has a lot less to do with worrying about terrorism or the safety of Israel, and everything to do with oil company profits.


8 thoughts on “Here’s The Real Reason Why Some Americans Hate Iran Nuclear Deal

  1. Ted,

    A great piece of analysis. One question though. In 20 years, do you really think oil will be “big”? Wind, thermal, tidal, etc., combined with a decentralized power grid, technological innovation and so forth, seems to be leading inevitably toward a world in which oil is necessary but only in trivial amounts.

    We’ll find out exactly who has nukes a couple years after the bacteria that’s been genespliced to turn CO2 into ethanol is developed.

  2. Have you seen the “Citizens For A Nuclear Free Iran” commercials? Here’s a sample…..Because Iran has violated over 20 international agreements and consistently lied to International Atomic Energy Agency inspectors, we cannot trust Iran to abide by this agreement. As every official from the President on down has said, we must have anytime, anywhere inspections to know whether Iran is cheating. Yet this agreement, prevents those inspections. If Iran objects to a requested inspection, a committee which includes Iran, Russia and China would deliberate. While the committee is deciding what to do, the Iranians can hide evidence of their activity.

    Source: U.N. Treaty and Convention Ratifications: 7/16/53, 8/14/56, 2/3/65, 8/29/68, 3/5/70, 6/24/75, 7/13/94, 11/3/97, 11/20/06, 9/26/07, 4/20/09, 9/21/10; U.N. Security Council Resolutions: 1696, 1737, 1747, 1803, 1835, 1929, 1984, 2049

    Check the source dates? 1953? 56?? What the fuck?

    • “Because Iran has violated over 20 international agreements and consistently lied to International Atomic Energy Agency inspectors, we cannot trust Iran to abide by this agreement.”

      And how many international agreements has Israel violated? HA! Trick question – Israel pretty much refuses to accept those agreements in the first place.

      • I’m still wondering what Iran did in 1953 that’s used as an example here.

      • To the best of my memory – Iran had a democratically elected government in 1953. The CIA kicked it over at BP’s behest.

        They put the Shah back into power, which set up the Iranian revolution & gave us the Ayatollahs.

    • In 1953, British oil companies owned all the oil wells in Iran. The Iranians elected a dictator who deposed the lawful, internationally recognised Head of State (the Shah) and ‘nationalised’ (i.e., stole from their rightful owners) all foreign property in Iran. The British were too debilitated by WWII to do anything, but, fortunately, they had a BFF in the US who restored all those properties to their rightful owners. Namely, US oil companies.

      The Shah ruled wisely and well until 1973 when he, like the previous dictator, nationalised all oil properties, stealing them from their rightful owners, so the US, while saying it was fully supporting the Shah, only provided weapons on paper, not actual deliveries. Kissinger had found a shy, ascetic Ayatollah in France who had no interest in oil, but who would focus on executing apostates and stoning harlots. Carter saw that Ayatollah installed as the Iranian Head of State, and was sure that, as Kissinger promised, all oil properties would be returned to their rightful owners. But, again, Iran violated International Treaties.

      The world cannot trust any nation that steals American private property from its rightful owners, and Obama is a fool to let the Iranians have ANY of their own money, all of which rightfully belongs to the US of A.

  3. Yeah, note to Zionists and their sycophants as well as regular morons:

    Idioms don’t translate.