IRAN: LOOK AT THE REGIME, THEN DECIDE

Before debating deals, sanctions, or timelines, we should remind ourselves exactly who we are dealing with—and ask whether any regime like this should ever be trusted with nuclear capability 

 

 

For months, the world has been consumed by war, diplomacy, ceasefires, memorandums of understanding, and negotiations over Iran’s nuclear program. Politicians will argue over whether the deal is good or bad. Experts will debate enrichment levels, verification mechanisms, sanctions relief, and military strategy.

Those are important discussions.

But before we get into any of that, we should remind ourselves exactly who we are dealing with, because that is the real question. Before discussing what concessions should be made, what sanctions should be lifted, or what restrictions should remain in place, we should first ask ourselves a simple question:

Should a regime like this ever be trusted with nuclear capability?

Since the Islamic Revolution of 1979, Iran’s ruling regime has built one of the most repressive systems on earth. According to human rights organizations, Iran regularly ranks among the world’s leading executioners. Thousands of people have been executed over the past two decades, including political dissidents, protesters, ethnic minorities, and individuals convicted under broad religious laws.

Public hangings have long been a feature of the regime’s justice system. Executions have been carried out in public squares as warnings to the population. Human rights groups have repeatedly documented cases where juveniles, political prisoners, and members of minority communities were sentenced to death.

Women face punishment for refusing to comply with strict dress codes. The state continues to police personal behavior, speech, and religious beliefs. Even activities as mundane as attending mixed social gatherings, criticizing the government, or challenging religious authorities can attract official attention, arrest, imprisonment, or worse.

The death of Mahsa Amini in police custody ignited nationwide protests that spread across Iran. Human rights organizations estimate that hundreds of demonstrators were killed during the crackdown and thousands more were arrested. Reports emerged of torture, sexual abuse, forced confessions, and deaths in custody.

Religious minorities face constant pressure. Christians, Baha’is, Jews, Sunni Muslims, and other minority groups have reported discrimination, arrests, property seizures, and restrictions on worship. Converts from Islam to Christianity have faced imprisonment and prosecution. House churches have been raided and pastors arrested.

Homosexuality remains criminalized under Iranian law. Same-sex relations can carry severe penalties, including the death penalty. Human rights organizations have documented executions and lengthy prison sentences over the years under these laws.

The regime’s repression does not stop at its own borders.

Iran has spent decades funding, training, and arming proxy organizations throughout the Middle East. Hamas, Hezbollah, Palestinian Islamic Jihad, Shiite militias in Iraq, the Houthis in Yemen, and other armed groups have all received varying degrees of Iranian support. These organizations have been responsible for wars, rocket attacks, terrorism, and instability that have cost countless civilian lives throughout the region.

American blood has been spilled as well.

According to U.S. military assessments and congressional investigations, Iranian-backed militias and weapons were responsible for the deaths of hundreds of American service members during the Iraq War. Estimates commonly cited by U.S. officials place the number at more than 600 American troops killed by Iranian-backed forces and explosively formed penetrators supplied through Iran.

Iranian leaders have also repeatedly called for the destruction of Israel. For decades, official slogans such as “Death to America” and “Death to Israel” have appeared at regime-sponsored events. Iranian officials have funded organizations dedicated to Israel’s destruction while supporting groups that openly target civilians.

The regime’s hostility has extended beyond the Middle East. Iranian operatives and proxies have been linked to assassination plots, terrorist attacks, hostage-taking operations, and attempted attacks on dissidents, journalists, and foreign officials around the world. U.S. authorities have repeatedly accused Iranian operatives of plotting attacks against former American officials and public figures.

There is another aspect of the regime that deserves attention.

Iranian leaders have spoken for decades about exporting the Islamic Revolution. That is not a conspiracy theory. It has been part of the regime’s stated ideology since 1979. Those who think this ambition ends with Muslim countries are being extremely naive. The leadership has never described a limited geographic mission. The vision presented by the founders of the Islamic Republic was one of expanding their revolutionary model beyond Iran’s borders wherever possible.

This should concern everyone—not just Americans, not just Israelis, but Canadians, Australians, Britons, Europeans, and every country that considers itself part of the free world.

And this brings us back to the nuclear question.

Most countries seek power, influence, wealth, or security. Iran’s ruling regime is different because it combines political power with a deeply ideological and religious worldview. Its leaders frequently speak in theological terms. They portray world events through a religious lens and often frame sacrifice, martyrdom, and conflict as spiritual obligations.

That reality matters.

Because when people ask whether Iran should ever possess nuclear weapons capability, they are not discussing a normal government. They are discussing a regime that suppresses women, persecutes minorities, funds terrorist proxies, imprisons dissidents, executes opponents, and openly seeks to export its revolutionary ideology.

Whether one supports or opposes any particular deal is a separate debate.

But before deciding what should happen next, we should first remember who we are dealing with.

Because the question was never simply about uranium.

The question was always about the regime.

And once people look honestly at that regime, they may reach their own conclusion about how much trust it deserves.