Had everyone believed John Bolton's claims that Iran is a clear and present danger to this country, people would have elected John McCain back in 2008.
As it is, there are still many hard feelings from Iran's seizure of American hostages following their rise to power. Business Insider posted a misleading headline claiming a plunge in support for the Iran Deal. In reality, the polls show that if you ask people a vague general question on whether they support the deal, people will say no. But when it is explained in greater detail, people will support it.
And from the people who really matter, the people who live in the shadow of Iran, the dynamic is the same. The US Gulf State allies were highly skeptical of the Iran Deal. But when John Kerry and Russian FM Lavrov made a trip to Saudi Arabia to explain the deal to them, they were much more supportive.
Iran's behavior during the time frame following their revolution was unacceptable and brought about international condemnation. Therefore, Iran had to earn the trust of the international community before they could rejoin the family of nations. And the burden of proof is still on Iran to continue earning the trust of the US and the rest of the world. The Iran Deal contains provisions which allow for sanctions on Iran to "snap back" if there is a violation by Iran. In many respects, it is no different than the deal that Ronald Reagan negotiated with the Soviet Union -- it is not based on trust, but verification.
Mr. Bolton writes:
Yet the very language of the Vienna deal demonstrates the opposite. In two provisions (Paragraphs 26 and 37), Iran rejects the legitimacy of sanctions coming back into force. These passages expressly provide, in near identical words, that “Iran has stated that if sanctions are reinstated in whole or in part, Iran will treat that as grounds to cease performing its commitments under this JCPOA” — Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action — “in whole or in part.”
Iran can, of course, back out of this deal if it chooses to. But what Mr. Bolton says is true of any deal that has ever been written. But if a country backs out of such a deal, there will be consequences. Other countries will have a hard time doing business with Iran, regardless of their attitudes towards the US. The US would have to work cooperatively with the rest of the parties to the deal -- if they acted on their own, then the US would be seen as the villain.
If Iran were to choose to back out of the deal, there would be a number of negative consequences for both them and the whole region. Israel might choose to bomb them. It could trigger an arms race throughout the Middle East, something that this deal is designed to prevent. The US could choose to build bases again in places like Saudi Arabia in an effort to protect their allies in the region. China would not be happy since Iran is part of their "Silk Road" project for the 21st century.
The fact that Iran still rejects the legitimacy of sanctions, as Mr. Bolton notes, means that there has to be some sort of trust in order for the US to sign on the dotted line. But any reasonable person can see for themselves that Iran has no interest in obtaining nuclear weapons. During the height of the Iraqi government's chemical weapons attacks on Iran, the Ayatollah Khomeini, founder of the Iranian Revolution, issued a fatwa declaring nuclear weapons to be haram, or forbidden by Islam. This was repeated by the Ayatollah Khameini, his successor. While Iran may have serious problems in regards to human rights and in its support for Assad and Hezbollah, there are certain lines that it will not cross. Starting a war of aggression, for all their bluster, is one of them. Procuring nuclear weapons is another.
The ball is in Chuck Schumer's court along with many other Democrats in the House and Senate. He has a choice between being on the side of the Military Industrial Complex (who always wants more wars in order to create even more profits), or the people. If he decides to promote war with Iran through the rejection of this deal, many of us will have a hard time supporting Democrats for office unless, of course, they stand with the working people of this country along with the President. I'm not saying that's fair; however, I'm saying that's how a lot of people think. The Democrats will continue to lose elections just like they did in 2014 and 2010 for as long as they continue to sell out the working people of this country and do the bidding of the 1% and the Military Industrial Complex.
We have too many problems for us to obsess about getting into war with Iran or any other country for that matter. Our planet is in increasing danger from climate change, given the massive increase in extreme weather and wildfires this year. Our roads and bridges are crumbling and in need of repair. Nobody is willing to provide any kind of a cost estimate for a war with Iran, or what sort of austerity measures we will have to endure as a nation in order to pay for it. And nobody has come up with what kind of impact a war on Iran would have on the planet given the clear and present danger of climate change. But it is a lot easier for Mr. Bolton and certain other proponents of war or regime change to solve other peoples' problems than it is to solve our own.