Nuclear Deal:
A Tale of two Conflicting Paradigms:
The Sacred and the Profane[1]
Hassan Mansoor
Professor of Economics
- The Dichotomy of Sacred and Profane Universes
The Islamic Republic of Iran operates within two conceptual paradigms: the Sacred and the Profane. The former, articulated through Shiite ideology as “Daar-Ol-Islam”, represents an idealized universe meant to endure and ultimately prevail. However, as it exists solely in ideological constructs, it remains fictitious and perpetually at odds with its surrounding environment. In contrast, the Profane world, “Daar-Ol-Harb”, comprises the tangible, transient reality—one to be conquered, subjugated, and eventually eliminated.
- Structural Foundations of the Sacred Universe
The sacred universe is built upon a distinctive ideological framework governing fundamental aspects of life—human nature, rights, family, property, commerce, societal structure, war, peace, crime, and punishment—each diverging significantly from those recognized by the profane world. Until the moment arises to assert dominance over the Profane, the Sacred Universe must establish a modus vivendi, requiring diplomatic engagement.
III. Negotiation as Strategic Pause
Negotiations within this framework serve not to alter the fundamental objectives of the sacred universe but merely to adjust tactical approaches to suit them. The ultimate eradication of the Profane remains an immutable objective. Consequently, rather than fostering compromise, negotiations function as periods of respite, temporary pauses in pursuit of predetermined strategic goals.
- Understanding the Sacred Universe
To effectively engage with the sacred universe, one must comprehend its foundational texts, which include the Quran (The Holy Book), Sunna (traditions descending from the prophet), and Hadith (narratives), among other sources.
The Quran, revered as the divine word, is considered the most authoritative source, providing core beliefs, ethical frameworks, and legal foundations. It is complemented by the Sunna, which represents the traditions and practices of the Prophet Muhammad, offering insights into his actions and teachings. As the verse 21 of Chapter 33 of Quran (The Confederates) decrees “The messenger of God has set up a good example for those of you who seek God and the Last Day, and constantly think about God”
Hadith collections, which document narrations about the Prophet’s sayings and deeds, further expand upon the principles laid out in the Quran and Sunna. Scholars meticulously authenticate and categorize Hadiths to ensure their reliability, as they play a crucial role in shaping jurisprudence and theological interpretation.
Beyond these primary sources, other scholarly works and jurisprudential schools contribute to deeper engagement with the sacred universe, allowing individuals to navigate contemporary challenges while remaining grounded in tradition.
- The Divergence in Human Rights Concepts
A comparative analysis reveals profound disparities between the Sacred and Profane universes regarding human rights and civil liberties. While the sacred universe formally adheres to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, it does not observe its core principles. The Charter asserts:
– Article 3: Right to life, liberty, and security.
– Article 5: Prohibition of torture and degrading treatment.
– Article 9: Ban on arbitrary arrest.
– Article 12: Protection of personal privacy.
– Article 17: Safeguarding of property rights.
– Article 18: Freedom of thought, conscience, and religion, including the right to convert.
Despite formal recognition, the sacred universe implements its own juridical principles, including:
- Public and private corporal punishment.
- Mutilation as judicial retribution.
- Systematic physical and psychological torture.
- Execution by stoning.
- Arbitrary confiscation of private property.
- The JCPOA: A Principled Agreement or Tactical Respite?
The 2002 revelations about Iran’s clandestine nuclear facilities in Natanz and Arak—despite previous denials—echoed the concerns surrounding appeasement. The international community, particularly European states, leaned towards diplomatic engagement and economic incentives rather than immediate confrontation. However, this approach arguably allowed Iran to continue refining its nuclear capabilities, leveraging negotiations as a strategic shield.
The Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) in 2015, serves as an illustrative case study in Iran’s diplomatic conduct. While the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) introduced monitoring mechanisms, critics contended that Iran’s long-standing practice of strategic ambiguity necessitated rigorous enforcement. American policymakers argued that Iran’s expansionist ambitions—including proxy warfare, interference in regional affairs, and ballistic missile development—violated the spirit of the accord. The eventual U.S. withdrawal, followed by Iran’s escalatory measures, underscored the profound volatility inherent in sustained ambiguity.
From a Western perspective, the JCPOA represented an initial step toward normalizing an anomalous regime. Conversely, for Iran’s leadership, it functioned as a strategic interlude—an opportunity to consolidate power, expand influence, and fortify ideological and military objectives.
VII. The Inviolability of Regime’s Strategic Intentions
Islamic Republic of Iran remains steadfast in its ultimate objectives, including exporting the Islamic Revolution and total uprooting of the state of Israel. The drive to acquire the deadliest weapon is reflected in the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) emblem: “Equip yourself with the highest weaponry to cast terror in the hearts of your adversaries.“[2] Simultaneously, a religious edict (fatwa) prohibiting nuclear arms, serves as a diplomatic gesture, designed to placate external scrutiny while preserving strategic ambitions.
Taqiyya has historically been used and advocated by Shiite Clerics as a means of self-preservation in times of persecution. Over time, taqiyya has become a doctrinal principle, allowing believers to safeguard their faith while maintaining outward conformity in hostile environments.
The concept of Towriya, however, is less widely documented in mainstream Islamic discourse. While some sources suggest it involves presenting partial truths to make a falsity appear plausible,
These two Shiite principles are further fortified by a self-serving interpretation of verse 89 of Chapter 5 in Quran (Surah Al-Ma’idah) which decrees “God does not hold you responsible for the mere utterance of oaths: He holds you responsible for your actual intentions -the intentions in your heart when uttering the oath. If you violate an oath, you shall atone by feeding ten poor people from the same food you offer to your own family, or clothing them, or by freeing a slave. If you cannot afford this, then you shall fast three days. This is the atonement for violation of oaths that you swore to keep”.
The verse underscores the importance of intention in oaths and lays out specific methods of atonement for broken promises. The interpretation of this verse varies across different Islamic traditions, and while some groups emphasize its ethical implications, others may incorporate it into broader practical frameworks. While some critics argue that this can allow for strategic misrepresentation, specially in war-related circumstances where “War is deceit” (Hadith from Sahih Bukhari). Consequently, an eventual revelation of a BOMB is a probable offshoot of a time-honoured trust and appeasement.
VIII. Historical Context: Iran Versus Totalitarian Precedents
Superficial comparisons can be drawn between Iran’s governance and historical authoritarian regimes, such as Nazi Germany and Stalinist USSR. However, a critical distinction must be noted: Hitler and Stalin emerged as aberrations within the modern world, shaped by the Renaissance and Reformation. By contrast, Iran’s Islamist regime remains pre-modern, constructed upon an entirely different ideological foundation.
- The JCPOA and Economic Ramifications and the “City of God”
Implemented in 2016, the JCPOA temporarily alleviated Iran’s economic stagnation by lifting sanctions and partially reintegrating the country into global markets. However, the primary beneficiaries were state-controlled entities—most notably the IRGC and Hezbollah-linked proxies—rather than the general Iranian population.
- U.S. Withdrawal and Economic Isolation
The Trump administration’s withdrawal in 2018 reimposed punitive sanctions, severing Iran’s access to global financial systems. Key measures included:
- Blocking Iranian access to U.S. dollar clearances.
- Disconnecting Iranian banks from SWIFT and severing life-lines of the economy.
- Penalizing Iranian violations of Financial Action Task Force (FATF) regulations as Antil-money-laundering and financing of terrorism and engaging in trans-border criminal activities (Palermo convention).
- Expanding secondary sanctions, exacerbating economic isolation.
- The U.S. Elections and Iranian Strategic Calculations
The 2020 U.S. presidential election eclipsed domestic crises in Iran—including inflation, unemployment, and shortages—due to its profound geopolitical significance. Iranian leadership closely monitored electoral developments, recognizing the direct implications for Tehran’s economic and diplomatic future.
XII. Iran’s Economic Decline
Iran’s fiscal crisis deepened as foreign reserves plummeted from $122 billion in 2018 to $8.8 billion in 2020 (IMF). Trade deficits widened, compelling Iran to rely increasingly on barter arrangements due to restricted financial access. Even historically allied nations—China, India, and Iraq—hesitated to release Iran’s frozen assets, estimated at $40 billion.
XIII. Prospects for a Negotiated Agreement with the US
The trajectory of a new Agreement hinges on political shifts in both Tehran and Washington. A Democratic administration might have pursued re-engagement, reviving the JCPOA with adjustments. Conversely, continued U.S. pressure would likely compel Iran toward fresh negotiations.
Ultimately, the fate of Iran’s economy, regional security, and international relations depends on how effectively a renewed Agreement defines expectations, enforces compliance mechanisms, and mitigates strategic risks.
XIV. The Viability of a Perfect Nuclear Deal with Iran
For the Islamic Republic of Iran, the preservation of power remains its paramount objective—whether achieved through negotiation or, if necessary, conflict. Even a war, despite its devastating impact on national infrastructure, could paradoxically serve as a means for the regime to secure its grip on power and rule upon the debris of a country if it is allowed to.
The feasibility of any nuclear agreement hinges on a delicate balance between competing interests among multiple stakeholders:
- The United States seeks to eliminate Iran’s nuclear threat while potentially securing investment opportunities in its sizeable 90-million-strong market.
- The European Union demands broader containment, aiming to curb both nuclear and missile capabilities.
- Russia, as a “strategic ally”, benefits from prolonged deadlock between Iran and Western powers, sustaining its leverage in regional geopolitics.
- China prefers a subjugated Iran, economically dependent and compliant with Beijing’s broader strategic ambitions.
- Iran’s neighbouring countries, each with distinct priorities, broadly favour a weakened Iran that cannot project power regionally.
- Iranian citizens stand to gain from nuclear containment—if it undermines the regime’s authority and grip on its oppressive apparatus, enough to pave the way for mass mobilization and potential overthrow.
The interplay between security concerns and economic incentives is central to these dynamics. While Western powers prioritize non-proliferation, other actors—Russia and China in particular—see Iran’s predicament as an opportunity to advance their strategic agendas. Meanwhile, the Islamic Republic itself will only agree to terms that do not fundamentally threaten its ruling structure.
Ultimately, the question is not merely whether a deal is possible, but whether a deal can serve the long-term interests of those seeking genuine stability rather than short-term tactical gains.
June 2025, England
[1] An original version of thIS paper was published in the Site of RAHAVARD IN 2020.
[2] Verse 60 of Chapter 8 (The bounty), Holy Quran
