The Times op-ed page has an article by Seyed Hossein Mousavian and Mohammad Ali Shabani under the headline "How To Talk To Iran." It says, "We believe Iran would be open to new measures regarding the transparency of its nuclear program, and would agree not to pursue any capability to enrich uranium beyond that needed to fuel atomic power plants, if its legitimate right to enrichment under the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty was recognized and if an agreement to remove sanctions was reached."
What the op-ed does not say is that the sanctions America has on Iran are not solely related to the Iranian nuclear program, but are also related to Iran's support for terrorism and its poor record on human rights. According to the Comprehensive Iran Sanctions, Accountability, and Divestment Act of 2010, Public Law 111-195, which was signed into law by President Obama, for example, Congress found, "The Government of Iran continues to engage in serious, systematic, and ongoing violations of human rights, including suppression of freedom of expression and religious freedom, illegitimately prolonged detention, torture, and executions. Such violations have increased in the aftermath of the fraudulent presidential election in Iran on June 12, 2009." The law also says that "international diplomatic efforts to address Iran's illicit nuclear efforts and support for international terrorism are more likely to be effective if strong additional sanctions are imposed on the Government of Iran." [emphasis added] Likewise, a second law, the National Defense Authorization Act for 2012, which imposed additional sanctions, speaks of "the illicit activities of the Government of Iran, including its pursuit of nuclear weapons, support for international terrorism, and efforts to deceive responsible financial institutions and evade sanctions." [emphasis added].
Dropping the sanctions in connection with a deal on nuclear issues alone, leaving Iran free to support terrorism and abuse its own population, would be a huge win for the Iranian government and a significant change to bipartisan and longstanding American policy. It's not surprising that that is what the Iranian government would ask for. But it's not clear that such a deal would advance American interests, or the interests of global peace and security, or the interests of the Iranian people. In fact, it probably would not.