Diplomacy Without Memory: Feeding the Hitler of Our Time
The Deal That Betrayed the Iranian People
For nearly half a century, the Islamic Republic occupying Iran has survived not through legitimacy, but through terror, deception, hostage-taking, and the West’s endless obsession with “deals.”
Every negotiation handed this regime more oxygen. Every pause gave it more time to build militias, fund jihadists, crush dissidents, and spread instability across the region and beyond.
And now, once again, the world hears the same recycled language: diplomacy, restraint, de-escalation, compromise.
But why is the world still rushing toward another deal?
Peace with whom?
If Hitler were still in power, would the democratic world negotiate a “better understanding” with the Nazis and the Gestapo?
Would civilized nations reward tyranny for surviving long enough? History already answered that question.
The Islamic Republic never wanted peace. Peace is fatal to revolutionary regimes built on ideological extremism. Conflict is their currency. Chaos is their survival mechanism.
After Qassem Soleimani was eliminated, the regime intensified its revenge campaign through proxies, terror networks, and ideological allies. As the regime’s leadership faced growing internal weakness, it doubled down on exporting instability abroad while tightening repression at home.
The warning signs were never hidden.
For years, I warned in my articles for The Times of Israel that this Islamic regime is not a normal government capable of reform or coexistence. It is an ideological machine sustained by fear, violence, and anti-Western jihadism. Every agreement made with it has strengthened the oppressor while abandoning the oppressed.
And now the Iranian people are asking:
What happened to the promise that “help is on the way”?
Iranians shed blood in the streets for freedom — not for another deal that keeps their jailers in power. Young women were shot. Children and their parents were brutally killed. Protesters were hanged. Families buried children murdered for daring to dream of liberty.
Was all that sacrifice meant to end in another handshake with their executioners?
The Iranian people did not rise for sanctions relief for the regime.
They did not die for diplomatic theater.
They did not endure torture, prison, rape, and bullets for another photo-op between politicians.
Yet every Western retreat sends the same message to Tehran: hold on long enough, kill enough people, spread enough fear — and eventually the world will negotiate with you again.
That is not diplomacy. That is surrender disguised as strategy.
And isn’t this exactly what the Islamic Republic has done for 47 years — funding foreign jihadists, exporting chaos, spreading fear, infiltrating societies, and exploiting division to advance its next agenda?
Who benefits when unrest, intimidation, and threats consume democratic societies?
Certainly not ordinary citizens or freedom-loving people anywhere in the world.
History has shown repeatedly that appeasement never moderates ideological extremism. It feeds it. Every concession strengthens the machinery of repression and gives tyrants more time to regroup.
The chants from Iran’s streets were never “better negotiations.”
They were: Death to the dictator.
The free world must decide whether it stands with the Iranian people — or with the regime that has held an entire nation hostage for nearly half a century and the entire world at risk.
Because this is no longer only about Iran.
It is about whether the civilized world still has the courage to confront tyranny before tyranny consumes everything around it.