WASHINGTON – Many Americans remain skeptical about a US-led deal with Tehran over Iran’s nuclear program, according to comments on social media websites monitored by Rudaw over the past two weeks.
Approximately 26 percent of Twitter and Facebook posts about the agreement have been unsympathetic to the November 24 deal, accusing the administration of US President Barack Obama of scoring a few cheap political points, while allowing Iran to continue its nuclear program.
“Obama is going to take away over 90M Americans’ healthcare plans but he is letting Iran keep its nukes,” wrote Gary Wheeler on Facebook, distrustful of the overall deal.
Others, like Jeff Karimi, wrote on Twitter: “The nuclear deal with Iran is progress for the US,”
A Reuters/Ipsos poll indicates that Americans support last month’s deal with Iran by 2-to-1. It showed that Americans in general are distrustful of the Iranian regime, but are not in favor of another war in the Middle East.
The White House sees the deal, between Iran and a US-led bloc of five other nations, as a “first step” toward a comprehensive deal to prevent the Iranians from developing a nuclear bomb.
Conservative and educational Christian websites and blogs such as raptureforums.com posted statements from Obama in defense of the deal.
"We cannot commit ourselves to an endless cycle of violence, and tough talk and bluster may be the easy thing to do politically, but it's not the right thing for our security," Obama said in comments posted by the forum. "We cannot rule out peaceful solutions to the world's problems," he said in San Francisco.
Social media users have reposted comments of Republican and Democrat members of the US Congress about the Iran deal.
One popular comment was by Republican Senator John McCain of Arizona: “I am concerned this agreement could be a dangerous step that degrades our pressure on the Iranian regime without demonstrable actions on Iran’s part to end its pursuit of a nuclear weapons capability.”
Democratic Senator Chuck Schumer of New York was quoted as saying: "I am disappointed by the terms of the agreement between Iran and the P5+1 nations because it does not seem proportional," said Schumer, a close ally of the Obama administration. "Iran simply freezes its nuclear capabilities while we reduce the sanctions."
Rudaw also sent survey questions about the deal to a number of Americans.
Zvi Shapiro, an accountant in Long Beach, California responded: “Why ease up on the sanctions now; if anything strengthen them now. They are hurting Iran. Letting up on them will only allow them the means to further and move quicker on their nuclear program.”
Shapiro believes that a country like Iran that has great oil wealth does not need a nuclear program: “Will we have another cat and mouse game similar to Saddam? Has this deal brought us closer or further from stopping them.”
He believes that with this deal the US has betrayed some of its allies.
“We have managed to stab the Israelis and Saudis in the back with this deal,” he said. “Haven't we learned from the past on so-called deals? Pakistan, North Korea made such agreements and broke them. Why would Iran be any different? Regime change is what is needed in Iran and we should support such efforts.”
Washington-based entrepreneur Josh Studl told Rudaw, “I have two diverging feelings about the Iran deal: One that is most shared by the critics, is that the deal doesn't go far enough to reduce or reverse Iran's capability to build a nuclear weapon.
“However, the deal is easier to accept if this is the first phase of many and the Europeans, Chinese and Russians will not hesitate to reinstate sanctions immediately if Iran fails to meet even the smallest requirement, disclosure or transparency,” he said.
Studl acknowledged that the tough sanctions approach had in fact proved effective in bringing the Iranians to the negotiation table.
“The applied sanctions on Iran seem to be changing Iran's policy, which is what they were applied to do in the first place.”
However, he said, the Obama administration might have been too hasty in reaching a deal.
“I see the Obama administration being driving more by need of a foreign policy win. Given how the administration so poorly handled its Syria strategy, I have reduced confidence in the Iran strategy,” said Studl.
Alex Gubbins, an English teacher from Wisconsin, questioned the sincerity and honesty of any of the sides involved in this deal. But he thinks the best way for states to build trust is by communicating and having an open channel for dialogue.
“When states do not talk, trust cannot be built. The best way forward is to talk,” he said in comments to Rudaw.
