Between North Korea and Iran, the likes of Donald Trump would appear to have chosen the relatively soft target. In terms of nuclear proliferation, Pyongyang has almost certainly surpassed Tehran. And yet by refusing to “certify” Iran’s compliance with the 2015 nuclear accord ~ the deadline was 15 October ~ the White House has made the outlook decidedly grim.
President Trump has virtually binned his predecessor’s watershed foreign policy legacy. Not that his belligerent mood will upset the applecart quite yet; America alone cannot pull out of the deal not least because the European allies, in league with Russia and China, are also party to the engagement ~ indubitably Barack Obama’s signal foreign policy achievement. Whereas Obama’s initiative was embedded in pragmatism, Trump’s governance has been marked by petulant rhetoric. Nonetheless, fears of a withdrawal are not wholly unfounded.
Moscow and Beijing have clearly indicated they will act to preserve the deal in the immediate aftermath of the US refusal on certification. President Trump has called for measures to counter Iran’s “destabilising actions”, and to “deny all paths to a nuclear weapon”, though without much clarity as to what this might entail. None of this contradicts the agreement formally, but the world would have expected a sharper focus in US dealings with North Korea.
Congress now has 60 days in which to decide whether to vote to reimpose sanctions whose lifting was a major provision of the quid pro quo contained in the agreement. It would be useful to recall that the 2015 deal offered the best possible assurances that Iran’s nuclear activities would be contained for roughly 10 years.
It imposed strict international inspections, and provided strong incentives matched with sanctions relief. By defusing the nuclear crisis, it had helped consolidate the more pragmatic or moderate factions within Iran’s power structure and had helped to prevent the arms race in the Middle East from escalating. Arguably, Trump’s stance may have turned the clock back.
The US President’s claim that Iran has violated the “spirit” of the accord is a nebulous defence of flawed geostrategy. Assessments conducted by the International Atomic Energy Agency have reported no violations.
In contrast, the White House is yet to cite empirical evidence to substantiate its contention. The agreement was solely focused on curtailing the regime’s uranium enrichment programme and removing its ability to build a nuclear weapon.
America will have to contend with what Iran calls a “crushing” response if its Revolutionary Guards are targeted by US sanctions. The diplomatic picture is unprecedented. The US President finds himself in unsplendid isolation not only vis-avis his close advisers but also in terms of America’s equation with the key international players.