In 2011 Britain’s Embassy in Tehran was broken into, ransacked and items stolen by protesters. Iranian protesters were there once again during re-opening ceremonies of Britain’s Embassy creating a ruckus and once again they were held back by Iranian police.

Britain has wasted no time in re-establishing diplomatic relations and speculation has it that it may be trying to beat the Europeans to the opening for a big business channel. Publicly, the move is widely seen as a step forward by an outside power to normalize relations with Iran. Conjecturally there may be negative ramifications in the near future based on Iranian deception and violations no matter how small it may be at present.

Be the first to know - Join our Facebook page.


On the surface, the restoration of diplomatic ties symbolically represents peace or at the very least a détente. This is sure to please at least Europe and many of the western powers since they are not on the receiving end of death threats from Tehran such as the threats to Israel and the U.S. though President Obama appears to have no particular concern about the stated death threats.


A diplomatic foothold is important to maintain a channel for political discussion and to foment bilateral business. I get it. But Tehran will not allow the U.S. to have an embassy and has not allowed one to be there since 1979 when it was destroyed by Iranian protesters. From the United States point of view everything will have to be conducted through the backdoor. Communication conducted in this manner is not always that good. The potential for conflicting political and business dealings is great when conducted with a wink and a nod.

There is definite potential for all of the P5+1 countries (except the U.S. at this point) to normalize relations with Iran to conduct business. Large technology and consumer relations corporations in the free world will have a new market opening with large potential financial gains.

Improving profit margins and economics are not a bad thing in a free world but not with rogue countries and states where terrorism is accepted for the obvious reason of more human rights abuses within and outside its borders. Having said that and in light of the old adage that ‘money talks, reason walks’ there is concern that business and corporations will have a stake in future politics and policies. They already do in most of the world.

This should never be the case in Iran, which has yet to prove itself as trustworthy and reliable following the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA). In fact there continues to be bellicose speeches coming from the Ayatollah and others in the regime.

In any case, this means where Iran cheats or becomes otherwise less compliant with the agreements made under the JCPOA, big business will have much to say if sanctions need to be replaced or other legal and diplomatic means have to be made against Iran.

Like the baby thrown out with the bath water, so wisdom will fly out the window with the ethics when money is involved. Iran will have more leeway and allowances for deviation from the JCPOA deal because big business will come to its rescue.

Israel, which has already been thrown under the bus by the concessions made to Iran, will be thrown further under the bus when big business gets involved with the world’s greatest state support of terror. Big business will support itself and protect itself with wheels and deals under the table and not worry about others such as Israel.

Europe will be pleased to have new, restored business dealings to boost its economy and will be loath to upset its financial interests even if Iran decides not to follow the deal as intended. Britain could very well feel the same way since the world economy is shaky at the moment. It will be very tempting to wink and eye and pretend not to see Iranian belligerency in order to maintain good will to protect the economy, ethics be damned.

Money will protect Iran and Israel will suffer as new terror weaponry will be used on Israel. The United Nations’ double standard would apply and all of the world would converge on Israel using bullying tactics to coerce Israel to oblige the world’s politically correct intentions. The world will not care because anti-Semitism is already on the rise everywhere especially in Europe. Britain has a long history of on again/off again relations with the Jewish state judging by its historical relations with the Arabs. The U.S. has its share of anti-Semitism.

The world will become exponentially less likely to support Israel when the world’s morals and ethics are turned upside down by the idolatry of money and the army of big business facing against Israel. Without a doubt, it is way too early to reestablish diplomatic missions and any significant business ties with Iran.
 
Relevant to your professional network? Please share on Linkedin
Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed in this blog article are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or viewpoint of The Jerusalem Post. Blog authors are NOT employees, freelance or salaried, of The Jerusalem Post.

Think others should know about this? Please share