Netanyahu is furthering the interests of the Iranian political and financial elite by opposing the US nuclear deal

Iran’s future will be decided by the nuclear deal. Its political stability depends upon it and history shows that aggressive sanctions generally fail. But some people appear to have a vested interest in seeing the deal ripped up – and it's not just US isolationists

Iran’s theocracy is based upon anti-Western and anti-imperial nationalism. So, why is the Israeli prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, reinforcing the same ideals upon which his arch enemy’s political system is derived?

In a speech on Monday, Netanyahu lamented Iran for allegedly “lying” about its nuclear ambitions in an attempt to further discredit the Iran nuclear deal. His excoriation, which is likely to only encourage president Donald Trump to bolster his aggressive stance towards Iran, actually serves the interests of the country’s political and financial elite.

Since the 1950s, the Islamic Republic of Iran has had a justified disdain for the West’s statecraft, after the UK and the US colluded to overthrow the country’s democratically elected prime minister, Mohammad Mossadegh. The revolutionary leader was removed from power in August 1953 by a MI6 and CIA sponsored military coup, upon nationalising Iran’s oil supplies, which were previously under the control of the Anglo-Iranian Oil Company – now known as BP.

The event marked the gradual deterioration of Iran’s relationships with both Britain and America and the population, rightly so, became suspicious of British and American influence within their country. The nation’s king, Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, who consolidated his power after Mossadegh’s removal, was subsequently supported by the UK and the US while serving as an Anglo-Saxon stooge until political discontent led to the Islamic Revolution of 1979.

Iran’s theocracy depends upon external threats from the West and its Middle Eastern allies. Since the country’s Islamic uprising, it has shunned the Western global financial system, a decision initially instigated by the Muslim Shia cleric, Ayatollah Khomeini, who served as the figurehead of the religious revolution of 1979.

Many anti-imperialists, who propagate the rhetoric of third world revolutionary leaders, prescribe to the views of Iran’s elite, who claim their political isolationism protects their people.

The argument has a degree of credibility. But do Ali Khamenei and his Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) actually serve the interests of Iranians? Or do they propagate demagoguery and anti-Western sentiment to justify a disparate political system?

Unfortunately, the latter seems to be the case.

Since the ratification of the Iran nuclear deal in 2015, the country has experienced economic prosperity. However, as a consequence of continued US sanctions and the rapacious appetites of Iran’s leaders, the population are yet to receive the financial benefits of the 2015 pact, while political dissidents remain oppressed.

Many of Iran’s political and financial elites would like the nuclear deal to be revoked. Their position of privilege is based upon the exploitation of the general populace and they are desperate for a third party to blame for their shortfalls.

The country’s leaders could chart a truly independent economic path for their people. But, as is the case with many once colonial subjects, those who have replaced their former masters have soon adopted their predecessors' ways. All of course, while vindicating themselves by holding their former colonial rulers to account.

Netanyahu’s comments only further the ideologies which Iran’s leaders perpetuate. Constant threats of American intervention and ongoing proxy wars in Iraq, Syria and Yemen have allowed Ali Khamenei and the IRGC to suppress Iranians while claiming to be safeguarding their welfare.

However, the primary victims are the Iranian people. The majority of whom have been exploited by Britain, America and Russia, who have historically used the country as a proxy playground.

Iran’s future will be decided by the nuclear deal. Its political stability depends upon it and history shows that aggressive sanctions generally fail.

When trading restrictions were imposed by the United Nations Security Council on Iraq in 1990, after Saddam Hussein’s invasion of Kuwait, the sanctions bolstered the dictator’s regime and, according to UN estimates, led to the death of 500,000 children.

Not only would the revocation of the Iran nuclear deal bolster the current government, but it would further punish the population, who have already suffered unjustly. And Netanyahu’s comments aren’t helping.