The bathos of the Iran MOU-boosters is beyond parody
Grown men and women are trotting out arguments that would shame a pre-schooler
Watching the Trump administration and its lackeys and surrogates try to spin the MOU with Iran is a spectacle for the ages. Even by the high standards of Trump’s second attempt at the presidency, their talking points are weak sauce.
A case in point: a panel discussion on CNN during which Trump ally Marc LoPresti repeatedly claimed that the $300 billion would flow as “investments” to Iranian “corporations and not the regime”. This is the logic of a 9-year-old child desperately trying to find a way to explain why he did not complete his book report.
When challenged on the obvious absurdity of this claim, LoPresti assured the rest of the panel that “there will be IMF oversight over those funds”. It should go without saying that this will never happen, but I will spell it out anyway: the Islamic Republic of Iran is a hardline theocratic fascist regime. In its very founding documents it pledges to bring the entire world under shariah law, by force if necessary.
This is the same regime that, just this January, slaughtered tens of thousands of its own citizens for the crime of protesting against its unjust, corrupt and capricious rule. The same regime that played hide-and-seek with inspectors from the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) while concealing its growing stockpile of enriched uranium.
Only an imbecile or a liar would claim with a straight face that the International Monetary Fund - which even democracies routinely flout - would have any sway whatsoever over such a government.
LoPresti is not alone in his desperate scramble for justification. Both JD Vance and Trump himself have said that the regime has turned over a new leaf, seen the error of its ways, and is ready to “rejoin the global community”. Other arguments trotted out include that the text of the MOU doesn’t capture the “spirit” of the talks, and that negotiators have developed a “shared understanding”. It’s always comforting when critical foreign policy agreements are based on “vibes”.
And so the USA’s official stance on this wicked and brutal regime has evolved from “We will end their civilisation tonight” to “Why shouldn’t they have a few missiles? Saudi Arabia has missiles!” A particularly funny talking point is Trump’s insistence that “Americans won’t pay any of the $300 billion - the Gulf states will!” One wonders if said Gulf states have even been consulted on the subject. Given the conduct and track record of Trump administration, we can be fairly sure that they have not.
The hard reality is that the USA, by agreeing to lift the blockade, has given up its last shred of leverage over Iran. Even if we discount the $300 billion “investment” and the release of billions of dollars of frozen assets, just the fact that Iran can now freely sell its oil is a huge victory for the regime. It is emboldened and strengthened and, within just a few years, it will begin to project its power over the entire region.
I will give LoPresti some credit. Towards the end of the panel discussion he strays off message and admits that “for the American people, this is about their wallets and what they pay at the pump. We have no tolerance for it. There’s no patriotic mission behind this. It’s not like World War II.”
Well, as his fellow panel members admit, at least that’s an honest answer. Trump, of course, remains snugly ensconced in his reality distortion bubble. When asked why he has settled for less than unconditional surrender from Iran he replied “Well, it probably is unconditional surrender”.
That tactic has served him well in the past, and it may well work this time. Most Americans never supported the war and are just glad that petrol prices are beginning to come down. Prices are unlikely to remain low for long, but that’s a whole other subject.
A more pressing problem is the growing discontent from inside his own coalition. The isolationist (and increasingly anti-Semitic) hard right, spearheaded by the likes of Tucker Carlson, Megyn Kelly and Nick Fuentes, have savaged both the MOU and the president. Fuentes, a vile hate monger at the best of times, even called for his followers to vote for the Democrats in order to “destroy the Republican party”
At the same time what remains of the traditional Republican caucus in Congress is huffing and puffing about the flimsiness of the MOU. War hawks like John Cornyn and Ted Cruz are pulling no punches. Cruz, ever the opportunistic reptile, told the media that the deal would be “a Marshall Plan for Iran… the leading state sponsor of terrorism for 47 years.”
John Kennedy, senator for Louisiana, had a more earthy take on the MOU: “Unless you were homeschooled by a day drinker, no one’s confident that Iran is going to do anything.” Connecticut’s Senator Richard Blumenthal called it a “seemingly disgraceful deal” that looks like “an unconditional surrender, not for Iran, but for the U.S.”
Is this, finally, the end of the road for Teflon Don? Like a cockroach, he has a habit of surviving adversities, up to and including nuclear apocalypse. Ironically it’s not the MOU that will be his downfall, but the price of oil.
Markets are currently celebrating the opening of the Strait of Hormuz, and pricing future barrels of oil on the assumption that traffic through the strait will bounce back to normal levels in a week or two.
The problem is that the real experts in global oil markets see things very differently. By their reckoning we are going to hit “tank bottoms” no matter what, causing prices to spike, radically, at some point in July or early August. Even Teflon Don is unlikely to survive gas at $7 per gallon three months before an election. Thoughts and prayers, Mr President.