What if the Obama administration aimed to take away the leverage propping-up the Revolutionary Guard and the mullahs; clearing the slate of past American financial obligations, thus holding Iran’s leaders much more accountable to their people?
This assumes quite a bit of competence and intent that may not have been present, but if it is a consequence (however intended/unintended), I’d likely support it.
I have been pretty much against the Iran deal, because I’ve been thinking the costs outweigh the benefits: It yields much American/Western leverage against a rotten regime, it puts what I think is a kind of idealistically misplaced faith in ‘international institutions’ (bankrolled by the U.S. taxpayer), and it may keep those controlling Iran (come what may) on the glide-path towards deliverable nukes.
The following responses to the below tweet might give some demographic insight into who protested in 2009, and who might be doing doing so now in Iran:
Some factions have gone all in for Civil Rights solidarity because it likely throws them a line in from the West (often wealthier, educated people in the suburbs around Tehran). There are a lot of poorer Iranians with few job prospects, however, who may be fed up with the same old revolutionary rhetoric.
In 2009 almost every person I knew in Iran was somehow involved in the Green Movement and attended at least one of many protests, in Tehran or smaller cities.
These days I can’t find anyone I know personally who has joined #IranProtests. The demography seems to be different.
— Negar (@NegarMortazavi) January 1, 2018
Why I didn’t support the Iran deal (see here)