AhlulBayt News Agency: “It’s a Mistake to Think the Biggest Problem With Iran Is Nuclear Weapons” written by New York Times columnist Brett Stephens, was published in the newspaper on April 15, 2025. Under the guise of a "realistic" analysis of Iran-US relations, the author in this text has, in practice, resorted to falsehoods, political stereotyping, and the promotion of a one-sided and hostile narrative against Iran.
This op-ed not only deviates from professional journalism standards but, through the distortion of facts and selective exaggerations, can be reviewed as an example of anti-Iranian propaganda.
1- False and selective information about Iran's nuclear program
Stephens claims that Iran "has enriched uranium to 60 percent and could produce nuclear weapons in less than two weeks." This claim is misleading because firstly, 60% enrichment does not mean the capability to build nuclear weapons. Even the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) has repeatedly emphasized that there is no evidence of Iran's efforts to build an atomic bomb.
Secondly, the claim of "producing weapons in two weeks" is an unscientific hypothesis, and no credible international body has confirmed such an analysis.
2- Hostile Stereotyping
In this piece, the author presents an exaggerated and hateful image of Iran:
- Accusation of supporting terrorism: Stephens calls groups like Hezbollah and Hamas "terrorists", while these groups operate within the framework of anti-Zionist resistance, and many countries around the world consider them liberation movements.
3- Contradictions regarding US diplomacy
On the one hand, Stephens attacks the 2015 nuclear agreement (JCPOA), and on the other hand, he proposes "normalization of relations", but conditions it on "Iran changing its behavior". This imperious view indicates that the author is not seeking a solution, but rather aims to impose America's demands on Iran.
4- Threat of war and violation of International Law
In the final section, Stephens openly advocates for a military attack on Iran's nuclear facilities, writing: "The olive branch is accepted when offered from the tip of a sword." This sentence is not only a threat of war but also a clear violation of the UN Charter.
Conclusion: A one-sided narrative with political motives
Stephens' op-ed is an example of anti-Iranian propaganda that is accompanied by the distortion of facts, stereotyping, and threats of violence. Instead of a fair analysis, this text seeks to justify America's hostile policies against Iran. If media outlets such as the New York Times, seek professional credibility, should refrain from publishing such biased content.
/129
Your Comment