Trump should use psychology, technology and economy in combating Iranian terror

Recent reports have indicated that the Obama administration’s nuclear deal with Iran is even worse than its critics thought. Besides releasing over $130 billion dollars to a regime that has renounced neither its hopes for nuclear weapons nor its support for terrorism, the previous administration also released Iranians involved in high-tech smuggling. These revelations, along with provocations like banning international inspectors from military sites, provide excellent reasons for President Trump not only to discontinue the deal, but also to open a broader offensive against the Iranian regime.

Deal or no deal, Iran’s leadership has made plain its intention to continue its drive for nuclear weapons. This objective is not surprising, since the promise of nuclear weapons is the only accomplishment they have to offer the Iranian people. The country’s economy is contracting. Until this year, this oil-rich country had to import gasoline. Public anger and frustration with the regime are kept in check only with the credible threat of force. In sum, nothing short of regime change will stop Iran from building nuclear weapons and the delivery systems to carry them.

{mosads}The U.S. can encourage this regime change, with minimal risk of war, using strategies similar to those President Ronald Reagan used to bring about regime change in the Soviet Union. From the start of his presidency, Reagan applied pressure to the Soviet regime, using psychological, military, economic and technological weapons. These combined pressures eventually led to Mikhail Gorbachev’s desperate (and doomed) attempts to save the regime from disintegration.

Trump should implement policies toward Iran that emulate Reagan’s actions toward the USSR. On the psychological front, Reagan forced the Soviet ambassador to show ID and go through the metal detector at the State Department. Close, open and constant scrutiny of Iranian diplomats to the UN, including long waits in holding areas while their credentials are checked at US airports, would demonstrate that the U.S. does not consider Iran a “normal” nation, but rather an organized crime syndicate masquerading as a nation. Rattled diplomats and spies make mistakes, the types of mistakes that are not covered by diplomatic immunity.

Reagan used military pressure at the periphery of the Soviet empire, in places like Nicaragua and Angola, to make the Soviets seem like uncertain and dangerous friends. Trump should do the same with Iran’s terrorist allies. Working with Israel to decimate Hezbollah and Palestine Islamic Jihad would make other extremist groups wary of working with Iran and compel Iran to provide even greater support, possibly exposing supply networks that could provide new targets for the recently-demonstrated MOAB.

On the economic front, Reagan denied the Soviets hard currency by putting a stop to work on a natural gas pipeline from the USSR to Western Europe. For Trump, nothing is more important than accelerating work on the Keystone XL and Dakota pipelines. While these are being completed, the Department of Commerce should aggressively market North American oil to Iran’s current customers. Even without success with this effort, more oil on the global market means less income for Iran’s mullahs.

In addition, Trump should abandon efforts to impose sanctions on Iran and instead make life miserable for European businesses that deal with Iran, much as Reagan acted toward Europeans who underwrote the Soviet pipeline. Without fanfare, the administration should single out such businesses for the harshest and strictest enforcement possible of all regulations governing imports to the U.S. and regulations governing doing business here. While there will be some collateral loss to U.S. businesses, the inconvenience will make Europeans hesitant about dealing with Iran.

Technology can also play a role. Possibly the most potent threat Reagan made toward the Soviets was the promise of strategic missile defense. This initiative, long before it became reality, threatened the one undeniable element of Soviet power – its nuclear arsenal. In the same way, Trump should threaten Iran’s most potent weapon –  its ability to close the Strait of Hormuz, using small vessels that have no purpose other than to threaten shipping in the Strait’s shallow waters. More than 60 percent of the world’s crude oil passes through this vulnerable choke point.

Recognizing this vulnerability, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, the UAE and Oman have been making plans for a road, railway, and possibly even a canal that would bypass the Gulf and thus render Iran’s “brown water navy” useless. Trump should offer whatever technical assistance might be necessary to hurry this difficult, but crucial, project along.

The Reagan administration recognized that power comes in many different forms, and that pressure can be applied in many different ways. While no effective foreign policy is without risk, emulating Reagan has the best chance of bringing about regime change in Iran without the costs of going to war. 

Ed Lynch is the chair of political science at Hollins University in Roanoke, VA and worked in the Office of Public Liaison in the Reagan White House.

The views expressed by contributors are their own and are not the views of The Hill.