Far from consolidating the American image of Iran as a fundamentalist state, the latter has set about teaching others important lessons in democracy. For in the same week that the country’s Parliament summoned President Hassan Rouhani to grill him over the rapidly deteriorating economic situation — Tehran approached the International Court of Justice (ICJ) to lift re-imposed US sanctions. At the heart of both moves are Washington’s efforts to forcefully choke Iran on the financial front. From the get-go, Trump Town has demonstrated its disdain for the multilaterally negotiated nuclear deal; from which the US unilaterally withdrew back in May. Earlier this month saw the first snapback on sanctions with a second round scheduled to kick in towards the year’s end. The result being that the rial has lost half its value against the dollar since April; with the monthly rate of inflation rising to 10.2 percent and unemployment currently resting at 12.5 percent. Iran’s lawmakers — including a handful of reformists — were reportedly not open to Rouhani’s linking of the current financial woes to American machinations. This is understandable to a certain extent. Especially considering that his predecessor, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, who had swept to power in 2005 on a similar mandate of economic reform only to immediately position the country on a devastating collision course with the US. Leaving the Iranian people to pick up the tab. Quite literally. Some pundits put the summoning to Parliament and the subsequent calls to reshuffle the Rouhani cabinet, including the impeachment of the Economy minister, down to an ongoing power struggle between hardline and reformist camps. That being said, the fact that the ruling regime has taken the sanctions case to the world court signals that Tehran is fighting back. Indeed, at a time when the US Defence secretary continues to lambast the country over “continued mischief” in the Middle East — Iran is prioritising due process over propaganda. Central to the regime’s argument is that the reinstated sanctions violate the 1955 US-Iran Treaty of Amity, Economic Relations and Consular Rights; which the ICJ observes is still in force. The White House, for its part, has already tried to argue that Tehran’s petition is without merit; slamming the move as an attempt to “interfere” with US sovereign rights. Which is another way of refusing to recognise the Court’s legal jurisdiction in this matter. In diplomatic terms and respect for due process, the Iranians have won this round. Though, of course, much will depend on the final ICJ verdict. Given that this could take years and that the Court has at its disposal no enforcement mechanism as such — moves must be made to rebuild bilateral ties in the interim. Not least because the many European nations that have protested the new round of sanctions do so in word only. As such, they are seemingly willing to sacrifice business interests in Tehran if this means avoiding falling foul of any punitive measures that may come their way. Thus the only feasible option at this stage is for both sides to engage in low-level back channel talks; with a view to revisiting the Trump offer of unconditional talks. This should be conducted away from the media spotlight and in tandem with the ICJ hearings. After all, the Iranians have been bitten before. * Published in Daily Times, August 30th 2018.