The Perennial 'Good Deal' Mirage
The headline tells you one story. The data tells another: FIRST INSTANCE: The 'Good Deal' Pretext (1979-1980s) When Iran became an Islamic Republic in 1979, the U.S. immediately framed the new government as an existential threat, often using the rhetoric of needing to 'negotiate' from a position of 'strength.' This period saw the cementing of U.S. sanctions against the nascent Iranian government,
despite calls for engagement from within the State Department. This was followed by covert support for Iraq in the Iran-Iraq War (1980-1988), which claimed an estimated 500,000 to 1 million Iranian lives (Council on Foreign Relations, 2013). The 'good deal' language then became a thinly veiled justification for containing and subverting the revolution. REPETITIONS: The Nuclear 'Deal' Cycle
(2000s-2015) For over two decades, Netanyahu, for example, has repeatedly warned that Iran was 'months away' from a nuclear weapon, a claim he first made in 2002. This narrative was consistently used as leverage for international sanctions and to justify military threats. Each 'deal' proposed by Western powers was framed as a last chance to prevent a nuclear Iran, while simultaneously imposing
increasingly stringent demands. The Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) in 2015 was presented as a successful 'deal' but was immediately seen by critics as 'not good enough,' setting the stage for its eventual repudiation. OUTCOMES: From Unilateral Withdrawal to Maximum Pressure (2018-2020) In 2018, the Trump administration, heavily influenced by Netanyahu, unilaterally withdrew from the