[mdibaiee]

We are not asking for foreign countries to "replace the Ayatollahs" for us. What we are asking, is ending their diplomatic relations with this government, or at least severing it, instead of trying to strengthen their diplomatic relations.

A deal between this dictatorship and the west will only strengthen them, leading to more oppression. A weakened dictatorship due to foreign pressure will make it easier for the people of Iran to replace them.

[lazide]

That’s already been happening for decades. Has it made any difference?

[ghufran_syed]

Well, there was pressure, until the Obama administration released $50 billion back to the regime https://www.factcheck.org/2019/03/obama-didnt-give-iran-150-...

[largepeepee]

And economic pressure means nothing to a theocracy that governs over a poor population. That is in fact their bread and butter.

Look no further than Afghanistan to see how resilient they can be. They even withstood decades of occupation.

Hard power alone wouldn't have worked and who knows whether soft power could have worked either since there were so many saboteurs both internal and external like Saudis/Israeli lobbies killing the project in its infancy.

[Siira]

The Islamic Republic is nothing like the Taliban. The Iranian population, especially around 10 years ago, was by no means “poor.” Iran has rich natural resources, very well-educated people (in STEM), and one of the oldest extant cultures of the world.

[lazide]

Eh, that reduced it but definitely didn’t release the pressure. Trump turned the screws down pretty tight in quick order too.

[fny]

Unfortunately, foreign governments only care about their own strategic interests, not Iranians. Do you forget who flew in Khomeini?

[icare_1er]

Iranians are quite ambiguous about that. When there are no riots, they generally blame the West for sanctions, cutting banks out, etc, as it ultimately impacts the normal Joe on the street.

Yet, when there are riots, they blame the West for not sanctioning enough...

One thing I do not understand - and if journalists are reading this, I hope this gets picked up, is that many of the Iranian elite's sons and daughters are actually living in the US. They try to hide that from both the American public, and the Iranian one (complete hypocrisy).

[Siira]

We Iranians all know that. It’s you Westerners who don’t. You deny visas to PhD candidates, while giving green cards to terrorists without a fuss.

[oliwary]

I am genuinely curious - are there any historical examples where ending diplomatic relationships and imposing sanctions on a country has improved the situation for people living there?

[weatherlite]

South Africa

[lazide]

It's not clear how much of South Africa's Apartheid collapse was due to external pressure, and how much was from internal problems.

They had widespread and growing internal rebellion for a long time, with independent internal discussions and controversies going on about the unsustainability of Apartheid - both from a moral and economic perspective. Hell, they even tried Mandela for Treason in '56 and spent 27 years in prison after he started the revolutionary group in '61.

Apartheid didn't end until the early '90's.

Saying external sanctions caused it, is a bit like saying the USSR collapsed because of embargos.

They definitely weren't helping make it stay, but it's hard to say those where why it collapsed.

[panick21_]

Economic sanctions mostly hurt the population and make the population less able to overthrow the government. Economic sanctions are known to strengthen the hardline elements. Its the hardline conservatives who can't deal with open economy.

Your arguments go against the research on this topic I have seen.

[JSfran]

This hardline/moderate is a myth at least for last 15 years. However, the Iran lobbyist (e.g. NIAC) keep this narrative alive. Even in the 2000s era, the crack in the structure were minor. The so called moderator didn't had the motivation to really change anything substantial. It turns out they just wanted to use the people vote as a bargain to re-incorporate them into power (that fraction was in power in 80s but then kicked out). The regime is pure hardliner bcz this is a regime that the whole power has been consolidated under the hand of supreme leader (and this is why people in the streets called him dictator). The parliament/president and the election is just a joke! A show! They've re-define almost any word and void it from meaning.

The Supreme Ayatollah has a flexible user interface (UI) for the "West". When he wants to retreats: It wears the so called moderate president (Khatami, Rohani) and when the business is as usual he shows his teeth (Ahmadinejad, Raisi). The so called "president" is a joke. The last one (Raisi) has basically no self-agency, he is all ears for his leader and openly is proud about it! The previous ones weren't much different but at least they put up a show or a fuss when they told to do something. But this last one is perfect pawn (A soldier of leader as he puts it): "Sarbaze Velayat". The show was such a joke that in the last presidential selection: The supreme leader even eliminated his own long time friends and allies such as Larijani* and played Qalibaf to reduce the chance of any uncertainty (+). Note even with those eliminated in the run, it was still selection between potato vs potato...

* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Iranian_American_Coun...

* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ali_Larijani

* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mohammad_Bagher_Ghalibaf

+ Uncertainty because previously people have tried to select the least favorable one for the grand Ayatollah, this time he didn't want to tolerate even that level of surprise! He has no fun!