Republicans, some Democrats, Saudi Arabia, and Israel aren’t the only ones complaining about the Iran nuke agreement. Iranian Islamic conservatives don’t appear happy with the deal at all, starting with Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. The Iranian Supreme Leader may given tacit support of the deal over the weekend, but doesn’t seem to really want it.

Whether the deal is approved or disapproved, we will never stop supporting our friends in the region and the people of Palestine, Yemen, Syria, Iraq, Bahrain and Lebanon. Even after this deal our policy toward the arrogant U.S. will not change..How can one negotiate, deal and reach an agreement with such a government (US)?

Other Iranian Islamic conservatives are picking up on Khamenei’s lip service. Mojtaba Asghari wrote in Vatan-e Emrooz he thought it was a mistake to focus on the removal of sanctions and to protect nuclear achievements. Google Translate didn’t do a great job of translating, but there’s still an interesting paragraph in his piece:

The amendment to the track and out of the negotiations “a bad deal” with determination and severity of red lines in America amid pressure to manage the negotiations with the former Minimalism was a considerable distance, again part of politicians and officials close to losing patience went to. To the extent that the minority by raising the ideological thesis “Peace President” trying to exert maximum pressure on the negotiator to accede to the terms of the middle…

Mohammad Sarafi had similar comments in Kayhan, and even compared the P5(+1) talks to some of the negotiations done by Reagan and the Soviet Union!

America against the Soviet policy consists of three elements: the external resistance against Soviet imperialism, internal pressure on the Soviet Union to undermine the Soviet imperialism resources, and interaction with the Soviet Union through negotiations in order to reach agreements to protect and advance America’s interests and promote the principles of reciprocity…So while negotiating and signing the agreement was the Reagan administration efforts to undermine the Soviet Union was doubled, and in 1991 Soviet Union disappeared. The practical implementation of the policy of America against the Islamic Republic, is not difficult…Since the beginning of the eleventh nuclear talks, analysts and media are creating an atmosphere that is the issue of Iran’s nuclear negotiations an internal dipole whose fate is sealed and lined an impact on internal processes. Accept and submit to the dipole induced and it will be alleged, however, that the negotiations led to an agreement, triumphant and happy during the first and second flow failed and hurt.

The Soviet Union-America comparison to the current agreement is pretty interesting. It shows why the Islamic conservatives, and to a lesser extent Khamenei, are complaining about the deal. A major bogeyman for Iran is going away: economic sanctions. Free markets and free trade encourage freedom. The Soviet Union collapsed not just because of America’s military power, but because of the free trade agreement the two sides agreed on in 1988. Iran would be forced to allow free markets if the EU and UN sanctions go away. European goods could flood into Iran and Iranian goods into Europe. This means Iranian businessmen get the cash, instead of the government. The more money goes to the people, the more they can pressure the government for more freedom. This is a good thing. Iran’s isolation isn’t just because of UN, EU, and U.S. sanctions. Al Jazeera has an interesting round up of how restrictive Iran has made trade.

The Iranian economy is also hindered by a set of laws that prohibit any meaningful foreign investment in the country. Over 16 years and three presidents, the country’s leadership has failed to loosen legal obstacles to foreign investment in Iran.

The case of the Turkish telecommunications company Turkcell is a prime example. After Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC) erected legal obstacles to the company’s operations in the country, claiming that it presented a foreign threat to national security, in 2005 Turkcell was forced to leave the market.

Khamenei and the Islamic conservative comments are much different than those of President Hassan Rouhani. He seems to be willing to go beyond the “Death to Israel, Death to America” rhetoric, and wants to make economic deals. Rouhani seems hopeful there will be prosperity and development by getting the deal put together. But Rouhani is in the minority of his government. The Islamic conservatives outnumber Rouhani’s party by a wide margin in the Islamic Consultative Assembly. Al Jazeera noted a law was passed trying to keep the talks from progressing too far, even if the parliament’s speaker promised it wouldn’t stand in the way. So Iran appears to be as divided as the U.S. is even if they’re trying to present a united front.

This does NOT mean the U.S. Senate should approve the deal. The fact no prisoners are coming back to the U.S. is just ridiculous and a sign of poor negotiators. President Barack Obama’s defense of why that didn’t happen is just weak. It really shouldn’t be surprising. After all, the Obama Administration traded five terrorists for an alleged deserter. The way inspections are set up are also ridiculous. The IAEA ought to be able to go in there and inspect at any time. But it’s possible this deal was put together in hopes it would fail. The only countries extremely happy appear to be the EU, but that’s probably so they can pay off Greece. Russia wants the deal to pass because selling cars, airplanes, and ships will help their floundering economy. That wouldn’t be bad, but considering how hands-on and cronyism-oriented Vladimir Putin is on everything, it may not do anything to help economic freedom in Russia. Plus, there’s always those pesky Russian weapons which end up in Iranian hands, deal or no deal. The Obama Administration is happy because of “lasting legacy” or something like that. But the Iran deal is probably doomed to fail. The question is just who kills it first: Iran or the U.S. Senate? What happens after that is anyone’s guess.

The original version of this article was edited to correct the spelling of the name of Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.

Taylor Millard’s opinions are his own and do not reflect the opinion of anyone else, any company he may or may not work for (so MYOFBYK), or anyone at HotAir. He can be found on Twitter @TaylorMVLR.