Michael Rubin makes a typically misleading argument about the Iran deal:

Therein lies the difference between the Iran deal, versus other episodes of U.S. interaction with rogue regimes and authoritarian adversaries: In the past, a desire for liberty and freedom colored U.S. action; today, Obama dispenses with any notion of liberty and freedom as guiding principles. The United States has lost its way.

Rubin’s complaint is wrong, but more to the point it is completely unfair. The nuclear deal is just that: an agreement designed to restrict Iran’s nuclear program. That is what it is supposed to do, and that is how it ought to be judged. To judge it by some other standard is a convenient way to fault it for failing to address issues it was never meant to address. If the nuclear deal succeeds in restricting Iran’s nuclear program and bars it from being able to build a nuclear weapon, it will have succeeded on its own terms. That is why Iran hawks are so concerned to change the subject to anything but the nuclear program, because they have already lost that argument.

As I’ve said before, hawks like to invoke the plight of the people in another country while arguing for coercive policies that harm them. Iran hawks pose as friends of Iranian liberty at the same time that they demand harsh policies that hurt Iranians, ruin their middle class, sabotage the political opposition, and concentrate more power in the hands of regime loyalists. They accuse advocates of engagement of ignoring the people that they would like to continue punishing, and they fail to see that their preferred policies strengthen the regime’s position against a weakened opposition. Hawks endorse cruel and destructive policies and then feign concern for the same people they are helping to impoverish.

It is important to remember that most Iranian dissidents see the deal as an opening for political and social change in Iran, and it is not surprising that Rubin doesn’t even so much as mention this. There is no guarantee that this opening will lead to anything, but it is significant that many of the Iranians opposed to the regime welcome the deal as an opportunity to pursue their goals. Aiding Iranian dissidents is not the goal of negotiating the deal with Iran, but it is reasonable to assume that an agreement that provides sanctions relief will help their cause and loosen the grip of the regime. Hawks that claim to be interested in Iranian freedom ought to welcome this development, but of course they don’t.