Business as Usual
The New republic
18-Aug-2009 (2 comments)

Sanctions are a controversial tool of foreign policy. There are plenty of people who question their efficacy. But the Iranian case may be closer to the South African apartheid regime than any other example. The Iranian regime obviously has extensive ties to the global economy. And the opposition to the regime has grown as it has acquired pariah status--a status that aggressive sanctions would reaffirm. Elites have begun to turn against the regime--and if sanctions further wound the national economy, not to mention their own bank accounts, they might be driven to rebel against the Supreme Leader and his perilious pursuit of nuclear weapons. But, of course, none of this will work if Europe goes about business as usual.

recommended by Fred



Fred, Kos Nagu

by liberation08 on

iranians won't blame the leadership if the arrogant powers impose sanctions on them. sanctions will hurt the people without threatening the regime


Sanctions, aggressive or not, have not negatively affected the..

by Ostaad on

regime. On the contrary, the counter-productive sanctions have hurt the Iranian middle/working class in the pocketbook, destroyed Iran's non-governmental economy, and created a large class of middle-men whose sole function is to bypass the sanctions and pass the ill-gotten revenues to the regime bigwigs - not to mention the foreigners who are assisting them in their sanction-busting enterprises.

In essence the sanctions are anti-Iranian middle class and pro-regime.

Some info about "articles" like this should elucidate who is behind the push for sanctions. Let's see.

The author is:  Benjamin Weinthal is a Berlin-based journalist who writes for American, Israeli, and German publications.

The one who posted it is: An amen corner choir boy and AIPAC tea-and-crumpets server.

Now that's business as usual! Works like a charm, for them.