Imam Mohammad Ali Elahi with Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif.

DEARBORN HEIGHTS — Local experts on the Middle East agree that the historic agreement reached between world powers and Iran over its nuclear program both prevents Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons and opens doors for cooperation between the United States and the Islamic Republic.

“This agreement is good news for justice, for all people who care for peace, for the world,” Imam Mohammad Ali Elahi, the spiritual leader of the Islamic House of Wisdom, said. 

Elahi, an Iranian American, said Iran and the United States won a battle without war. 

“The moment the final agreement was announced, you could see the explosion of joy and happiness in every city in Iran,” he said. “The sanctions were unfair and unjust. They affected the lives of ordinary people, from medicine to technology and transportation.”

Elahi added that after the Islamic Revolution of 1979, the Iran-Iraq War and international sanctions, the Iranian people’s perseverance gained recognition.

“The fact that a country in that place in the world could get rid of sanctions without war and without submission is a victory,” he said.

Elahi added that the agreement is a win-win situation for all parties involved. He said Iran from the beginning was not interested in having a nuclear weapon, citing a fatwa (religious ruling) by Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei that prohibits the development of nuclear arms. 

“Israel has hundreds of nuclear bombs and they are still frightened of a peaceful agreement,” he said.

Elahi also said Israel provides medical support to Syrian rebels— including ISIS and al-Qaeda— on its border, while complaining day and night about Iran.

According to Elahi, Israel is hyping the fear of Iran and fanning the flames of sectarianism to distract Arabs and the world from the suffering of Palestinians, “which is the real issue in the Middle East.”

The imam added that Iranians and Americans are not inherent enemies, adding that when Iranian hardliners say “death to America”, they mean the United States’ unfair policies, not the country itself.

He said the Iranian community in the United States is an example of productive cultural exchange between America and Iran. 

“Iranian Americans are serving this country in universities, in business, in hospitals,” he said. “The establishment of relations between this country and Iran will provide an opportunity for the United States to benefit from Iranian civilization.”

Elahi heaped praise on Iranian President Hassan Rouhani, whom he has known personally for decades. 

“He has always been a star, always shining, always positive,” he said. “He follows common sense. He is a moderate, intelligent, wise, constructive, respectful individual.”

Elahi added that both President Obama and Rouhani are leaving a great legacy of victory for diplomacy over violence. 

The agreement and U.S. interests

Dr. Juan Cole, a distinguished history professor at the University of Michigan, said the agreement implements an inspection regime that ensures that Iranians do not enrich uranium to a point where it can be used for military purposes.

Cole explained that centrifuge technology could theoretically be used for making a bomb. However, he added that Iran has agreed to keep its uranium enrichment rate at 5 percent, enough to operate a nuclear power plant, but far below the 95 percent enrichment required for nuclear weapons. 

“Inspections are frequent enough to get the job done,” Cole said. “All the experts say it would certainly prevent Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons.”

Given that the agreement prevents Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons, Cole said “it is a bit of a mystery” why the Israeli government is standing against it.

The professor, who has written several books about the Middle East, suspected that Israel rejects the accord because it wants tensions to remain in the region.

“Israel has used ‘Iranophobia’ to take the spotlight off its treatment of the Palestinians,” he said. “When the headlines are not about Iran, maybe the world will pay more attention to what Israel is doing in the West Bank and Gaza.”

Cole said Saudi Arabia opposes the agreement because lifting the sanctions on Iran would give the Islamic Republic access to resources that would strengthen its influence in the Middle East. Also, the Saudis do not want Iran to sell oil to the west, which would drive the prices down. 

“The Saudis want the Iranians weakened economically and politically,” Cole said. “Pro-Saudi and pro-Iranian factions are fighting across the region and the Saudis would like to have a victory.”

The fate of the agreement

Some (mostly Republican) members of Congress and Iranian hardliners are actively opposing the agreement, raising doubts about its fate.

But the accord is here to stay, Dr. Ronald Stockton, a professor of political science at the University of Michigan-Dearborn, said.

Stockton predicted that the House and the Senate might vote against the deal, but the president would veto that decision the same day. Congress would then need a two-third majority to override the president’s veto, which is unlikely to happen. 

Stockton added that even some Republican senators will eventually vote for the deal after speaking against it.

Cole said it is not impossible that Congress would strike down the nuclear accord. However, a change in the American position would not undo the agreement at the international stage, especially after the U.N. Security Council voted to lift the sanctions on Iran on Monday.

“French, Chinese and Indian businessmen are desperate to get into the Iranian market,” he said, adding the U.S. government can’t now tell them “we’re going to punish you if you deal with Iran.”

From the Iranian side, Cole said, the deal is safe because at the end of the day hardliners follow the orders of Iranian Supreme Leader Khamenei, who approves of the agreement.

“A diplomatic platform”

Leaders in Washington and Tehran have stressed that Iran and the United States remain at odds in their vision and interests in the region, despite the accord. 

“Of course, even with this deal, we’ll continue to have serious differences with the Iranian government, its support of terrorism, proxies that destabilize the Middle East,” Obama said on July 21.

Three days earlier, Khamenei said the nuclear agreement does not change Iran’s opposition to the United States’ “arrogant” policies in the region.

However, Cole said the nuclear agreement sets up a diplomatic platform for dialogue on other  issues. 

He predicted that the coordination between Iran and the United States in Iraq, where the two countries are de facto allies in fighting ISIS, will increase.

“The U.S. has bombed locations on behalf of the Iranian-backed militia [Popular Mobilization Forces] but couldn’t say so,” he said. “The agreement makes it easier and more efficient to cooperate with Iran.”  

Dr. Kamal Alsaedi, the president of the International Organization for the Defense of Human Rights, echoed Cole’s remarks on Iranian-American cooperation in Iraq against ISIS.

“But will Iraq benefit directly from this agreement?” he asked, rhetorically. “No. The main beneficiary is Iran. Iran is not a charity. Politics is a game of giving and taking.”

He added that while Iran might help defeat ISIS in Iraq, it will gain greater influence in the country.

Stockton said the United States will not abandon Saudi Arabia and Israel, its strongest allies in the region, but the agreement creates a “working relationship” with Iran. 

He added that it opens the door for the Washington and Tehran to discuss their disagreements and common interests.

Yemeni American activist Wali Altahif said the agreement will not impact his home country.

For his part, Elahi said the agreement proved that diplomacy could work, which enables negotiations in other areas.

“Yemen is a victim of the regional powers and the Saudis will continue its aggression on Yemen regardless of the nuclear deal,” he said.

Syria and the agreement

The civil war in Syria, which has proved one of the most destructive conflicts in the modern history in the Middle East, is major battlefield where Iranian and U.S. policies clash.

The United States insists that President Bashar Assad must leave as a pre-condition to a political solution in Syria, while Iran supports the embattled president politically, economically and militarily.

But Stockton said the two countries’ positions on Syria are not as contradictory as they appear. 

He said an agreement that would allow power-sharing but keep most of the regime in place without Assad would be accepted by all the states involved in Syria.

“What has changed is that we are able to negotiate this now,” he said.

As for Iran’s willingness to sacrifice Assad, Stockton said “states have no loyalties to individuals, but to interests.”

Cole also said Assad’s departure is essential to a political solution in Syria.

“Assad is unacceptable to a large portion of the Syrian population, who believe there will be problems as long as he stays,” he said.

Cole added that Iran sees Assad as the force preventing Islamist extremists from taking over, but the U.S. must find a way to convince Iran to reduce its support for the Syrian president.

A negotiated settlement would protect the interests of ethnic and religious minorities, he said.