WhatsappThe fall of a regime does not erase the crimes it committed, and it should not erase the judgments that follow.
For decades, victims of Iranian-sponsored terrorism have been told to be patient.
We were told the regime was permanent. That the Islamic Republic of Iran was too entrenched, too ruthless and too strategically important to ever be held fully accountable. Courts might rule in our favor, we were advised, but enforcement was another matter entirely. Justice, if it came at all, would come slowly—if ever.
Now, as the Iranian regime shows visible signs of strain, victims are watching events unfold with something closer to quiet vigilance than celebration. Not because we doubt what the Iranian people deserve—they deserve freedom, dignity and self-determination—but because we know how easily victims are written out of history when the world rushes toward a “new beginning.”
The fall of a regime does not erase the crimes it committed, and it should not erase the judgments that follow. Iran’s sponsorship of terrorism was not an abstraction. It was a deliberate, systematic policy carried out across borders and decades. Innocent civilians were murdered, families destroyed and lives permanently altered—not as collateral damage, but as strategy. These facts did not disappear with the passage of time, and they will not disappear with the collapse of a government.
In American courts, victims pursued justice when few believed that it was possible. Years of litigation laid bare Iran’s role in sponsoring terrorism, a record documented not only in judicial opinions but in the lived experience of families who refused to let the case fade into abstraction, as chronicled in my book, A Father’s Story: My Fight for Justice Against Iranian Terror, as well as examined in The Atavist’s detailed account, Hidden Damages, of the legal battle and its consequences. Judges heard the evidence, weighed the record and ruled accordingly. Iran was found liable. Judgments were entered. What followed was not legal uncertainty but political discomfort. The law spoke clearly, but enforcement lagged behind—not because of ambiguity, but because of hesitation.
As Iran now faces the possibility of genuine political change, the international community will encounter a familiar temptation: to declare the past inconvenient, to prioritize normalization over accountability and to treat outstanding judgments as obstacles to be cleared rather than obligations to be honored. That temptation should be resisted.
Governments may change, but states endure. Legal responsibility does not dissolve with slogans or reforms. A nation that seeks to rejoin the family of civilized states must confront its past honestly, rather than burying it under promises of reform.
The Iranian people should not be asked to carry the moral burden of the regime that oppressed them. But neither should victims of terror be asked, once again, to sacrifice justice on the altar of diplomacy. These are not competing claims. A future Iran that acknowledges the truth of its past, compensates victims and respects the rule of law would be stronger, not weaker, for it.
There is precedent for this approach. Other states that once sponsored terrorism ultimately recognized that accountability was the price of legitimacy. Settlements were reached. Victims were compensated. Normal relations followed—not despite justice, but because of it. That path remains open, but it requires resolve.
Western governments, particularly the United States and its allies, must ensure that normalization does not come at the expense of those who paid the highest price. Frozen assets, sanctions relief, restored immunities and diplomatic recognition should not be dispensed as blank checks. They are leverage, and they should be tied to concrete steps that acknowledge responsibility and resolve outstanding claims.
Victims are not seeking vengeance. We are seeking closure grounded in law. For years, we were told to wait. We did. We were told justice was symbolic. It was not. Courts ruled. Judgments stand. Interest accrues. What remains unresolved is whether the international community has the will to see the process through.
If the mullahs fall, the world will move quickly to engage whatever comes next. That rush must not trample the rights of those who have waited the longest. Sanctions relief, asset releases and diplomatic recognition are leverage, not gifts. They should be used to ensure that judgments are honored, victims are compensated, and accountability is preserved.
Justice delayed has already cost enough. Justice denied, in the name of expediency, would be a moral failure the free world should not repeat.
