Quote:
Originally Posted by Sidd Finch
Much as I support Obama's efforts in Iran, this exchange is just echo-chamber b.s.
I'll leave aside the "bomb the poor" silliness. Instead, I would guess that both you and GGG have supported sanctions, versus the transformative power of a business relationship, in certain instances, in particular instances -- especially with respect to apartheid South Africa. So you and I could be accused of the same flip-flop as the GOP is engaging in, by supporting that sort of engagement with respect to Iran (and Cuba).
So, why? What makes these cases different?
For Cuba, it's that sanctions failed, the country poses no threat, and there is a real opportunity for constructive engagement through business and capitalism, because they might benefit the Cuban people broadly (and there's the leadership-transition issue).
For Iran, it's different. Sanctions actually worked there, and brought the regime to a point of wanting to make concessions. Just because sanctions have worked, doesn't mean that more sanctions is the right call; instead, we should reap the benefit here. If this deal closes, Iran will be further away from acquiring nukes than it is now (or was 8 years ago), and a verification regime will be in place. But the regime's power is such that I doubt we'll see a broad beneficial effect to capitalist engagement.
|
You know, there's a difference between a troll and an echo chamber.
Russia is a current hot-button sanctions issue, too. But the drop in oil prices may well be more effective than the sanctions. The most successful case of sanctions was indeed probably South Africa, but let's never kid ourselves into thinking sanctions alone would have done much.
I think sanctions (and boycotts) can be useful in the short term, but they have diminishing returns over time and if near-permanent can become counterproductive (see, Cuba).
Obama upped the sanctions on Iran and now is harvesting the rewards from taking them off. This is good diplomacy, using them where they work but relying on other levers for permanent gains.
I think encouraging the growth of Iranian capitalism can be huge and deeply transformative for Iran. But by capitalism I don't mean oil trading; I mean the same sort of thing that is going on in India with the help of the Indian diaspora can go on in Iran with the help of the Iranian diaspora. Can't wait to do some Iranian deals. And I know some Iranians who can't wait either.
