Since the beginning of the post-cold war era, sanctions have been the United States secret weapon when attempting to punish countries whose policies aren’t in line with its own. Due to the Fed having financial hegemony over the global monetary system, the new tool of destruction created from the lab of the Treasury Department is financial warfare. According to the Cato Institute, sanctions have worked in 20% of cases, and often, the consequences of them extend beyond the intentions of the bureaucratic enforcers. Accompanied with sanctions, starvation, poverty, lack of life saving medicine thus resulting in thousands of preventable deaths, centralization of power, and ultimately leading to significant human rights violations. They are immoral and often threaten other countries with similar repercussions if they are to do business with the enemy country. Moreover, the power of our greenbacks dissuades the global banking system from performing transactions with their banks, therefore exempting it from international finance and leading its domestic industry’s to close down due to lack of credit. Sanctions deprive the country in all atmospheres of society. An example of the overwhelming damage that sanctions can cause can be seen in that of Iraq. From the beginning of the Gulf War to 2011, economic sanctions from the U.S. have costed it 4% of its population. Learning from history, which our present politicians have a tendency to ignore, ought to learn that sanctions are counterproductive, and in the end, damage liberties here and abroad.

Attempting to seize the opportunity of the nuclear deal, the recent ballistic missile test, and the overdramatized capture of American sailors, it is in President Trump’s interest to seek a deal with Iran. After all, sticking to the promise of his campaign slogan, “jobs!”, is precisely what this deal would create, and lots of them. Particularly, a deal with Iran would be a huge boon to America’s export market. In 2008, the United States exported nearly $1.7 trillion in goods and services. These exports supported more than 10 million full and part-time jobs and accounted for 12.7 percent of gross domestic product. Iran, being the third largest country in the Middle East, has everything that entrepreneurs are looking for in consumer markets; an educated workforce, a majority young population that have been rattled with sanctions and are urging to buy foreign products, while also seeking a way to modernize- which by now would be, and has been synonymous with technology.

A recent report, published by the National Iranian American Council, gives an in-depth look into the cost of sanctions to the U.S. economy. The number stands around $272 billion. Between 1995 and 2014, the U.S. sacrificed at least $203 billion and as much as $272 billion in potential export revenue to Iran. Furthermore, according to the report, a deal with Iran would create between 73,000-97,000 job opportunities that would enrich our export revenues. Additionally, Trump spoke of disrupting the $42 billion Boeing deal with Iran which has the potential of creating tens of thousands of well-paying jobs. However, being mindful of his promise to create quality employment domestically, he ought to let the deal continue at its current pace.

Moreover, while American’s are waiting on the bureaucracy’s thick red tape to loosen, European multinationals are already and have been making numerous round-trips to Tehran to sign multi-billion dollar contracts from everything to jet engines for Iran’s outdated air fleet, smart gadgets, heavy machinery, and pharmaceuticals. U.S. companies and entrepreneurs are standing still with their hands in their pockets, and most of the blame can be drawn from the very bowels of Congress and it’s neocon war party.

The pattern and rhetoric of war-mongering is eerily similar to that of the propaganda campaign that lead to the Iraq War and its unrivaled conviction of Iraq’s WMD capabilities. Ron Paul, as well as renowned investigative journalist Gareth Porter, and even the former chairman of the IAEA, Hans Blix, believe that the nuclear scare crisis was artificially manufactured, and warned of using “unverified intel to pressure Iran.” The consequences of the President-elect deciding to tear the agreement apart would mean that we’re falling right back into the booby trap of the Neocons. The war party is anti-diplomacy and does not care about individual rights. They ought not to be granted with titles of ‘foreign policy experts’, as reality has shown that their failed visions have cost America trillions of dollars and massive casualties. An interesting fact about Trump is he is the only presidential candidate in the 2016 campaign who sympathized with the Iraqi people and the casualties they suffered on their side, and not just limiting it to American soldiers. Those whom believe that sanctions are a ‘diplomatic’ or ‘peaceful’ alternative to war are fanatically wrong; Murray Rothbard agreed that sanctions are an act of war, and often, are counterproductive.

The best way for President Trump to begin his presidential cycle would be to bring his negotiation power to the table in Tehran, put aside our murky history with them, and conduct business the ol’ fashion American way, after all, it’s what we’re good at. He should bring incentives to the table for Iran to do business with American companies. At the moment, many of our favorite multinationals are banned from operating in Iran, including Apple and McDonald’s. To get things moving there, we ought to integrate them back into the international banking system so companies whom aspire to do business in Iran can establish credit lines and receive loans. In the meantime, we’ll be watching our European counterparts keep moving along with their productive ventures and reap the fat rewards that accompany first-mover advantage.