views

commentary

reaction to president trump’s decision to withdrawl from the iran nuclear deal

Two Views On Withdrawal
From Iran Nuclear Deal

T

here are two ways to view the presi- ior” tends to limit the search for common
dent’s decision to withdraw the
ground and progress in containing the
U.S. from the Joint Comprehensive
lethal spread of nuclear weapons.
Plan of Action (JCPOA), a six-party agree-
Trump has claimed that his withdrawal
ment of the five permanent U.N.
will somehow avert a regional
Security Council powers and Iran,
nuclear arms race. However, the
on preventing Iran’s development
reason for the JCPOA in the first
of nuclear weapons for at least 10
place was to prevent that very
years. The agreement itself was
development. Iran was judged
termed “interim” when negotiated
to be only a few months from its
in 2015, and technically while not
first nuclear bomb, which would
a treaty, has been judged by virtu-
clearly have set Saudi Arabia,
ally all reports of inspectors and
Iran’s staunch regional rival, on
Dr. Frederic
government officials, including
course to obtain its own nuclear
Pearson
Israeli and American generals, as
weapons, presumably aided by a
a success in ending Iran's weapons
partner such as Pakistan.
grade uranium and plutonium
A disturbing development
processing in return for lifting most eco-
that portends further regional destabi-
nomic and trade sanctions imposed on
lization are the growing hostility and
the country.
military clashes between Israel, already
In one view, the U.S. pull-out is fool-
a nuclear power with significant missile
hardy, especially at a time of prospective
capability, and Iranian-backed militias
negotiations on “de-nuclearization” of
in Syria, along with Saudi attacks on any
North Korea and the Korean Peninsula.
purported Iranian clients in Yemen and
The withdrawal (or as some term it, viola- elsewhere. Iran has extended its influ-
tion) coming on the heels of abrupt pull-
ence across the northern sector of the
outs from the Trans-Pacific Partnership
Arab world, through Syria and Lebanon,
(TPP) on trade and the Paris Climate
perhaps into Gaza, on the heels of failed
Agreement, undercuts U.S. credibility as a
attempts to resolve the area’s most press-
reliable party to international agreements, ing conflicts: the Syrian civil war and the
and certainly stings America's European
Israeli-Palestinian standoff. Nothing in
allies with little apparent concern for their the president’s move or his foreign policy
interests. Indeed, the president’s language approach, including the movement of the
about the “harshest” possible sanctions
U.S. embassy to Jerusalem, would appear
being re-imposed could expose our allies
to indicate a moderating U.S. influence on
and their citizens to strong U.S. retaliation these escalations.
if they continued to “strengthen” Iran’s
Clearly, regional conflict situations and
hand.
dynamics are extremely complex, with
The fulfillment of Trump’s campaign
parties displaying mixed motives. This
promises in these matters seemingly
administration’s tendency to view matters
amounts to a continued slap at anything
simplistically as “black and white” reflects
his predecessor achieved. As in the TPP
some of the same misunderstandings and
and climate areas, though, the administra- machinations, including phantom “nucle-
tion has given contradictory signals about ar weapons” claims and the assumption
possibly wanting back in to “improved”
that our might must be right, that got
arrangements at some point.
America involved in a needless, prolonged
The other view, from the administra-
and painful war in Iraq during the G.W.
tion perspective, appears to be that tough
Bush administration. Ironically, at that
talk, harsh criticism of target regimes and
time Saddam’s Iraq was inaccurately
heavy sanctions produce better deals, as
labeled a leading state-sponsor of inter-
perhaps will emerge in Korea. However,
national terror. Indeed, Iraq itself would
if we view nuclear weapons, and even
probably be an ISIS stronghold today were
conventional missile developments, as an
it not for Iran’s backing of militias to com-
expression of profound regime insecurity,
bat that terror group.
then anything resembling an attempt at
The long-run prospect of the president’s
“regime change,” as reflected, for example, JCPOA decision appears likely to make
in the president’s remarks about enabling
military clashes between Israel and Iran
the “Iranian people,” could simply drive
more likely, and to drive Iran further into
the regime toward further weapons devel- the waiting arms of Russia and perhaps
opment and provocative measures.
Turkey, with Moscow only too willing to
The president’s approach flies against
play both sides of the street — sticking
most standard diplomatic practice, which up for the nuclear agreement that Trump
emphasizes cultivating and building
abandoned and helping Iran weaken U.S.
trust over repeated successful dealings
influence in the region. •
(note Ronald Reagan’s “trust but verify”
Dr. Frederic Pearson is a professor of political sci-
approach to the Soviet Union). Treating
ence and director of the Center for Peace and
agreements and even talks themselves as
expendable or dependent on “good behav- Conflict Studies at Wayne State University.

8

May 17 • 2018

jn

FROM THE AMERICAN ISRAEL
PUBLIC AFFAIRS COMMITTEE
(AIPAC)
[This] decision is not an endpoint.
Rather, it provides an important
opportunity to apply further dip-
lomatic and economic pressure on
Iran in order to both prevent the
regime from ever acquiring a nuclear
weapons capability and to push back
against its expanding regional aggres-
sion.
It is our collective responsibility
to forge a bipartisan consensus to
ensure America’s lawmakers stay
focused on that effort. This cannot
be achieved by one bill, one initiative
or one announcement. It requires
a long-term strategy, backed by the
bipartisan support of Congress.
In the months and years ahead,
AIPAC will work with Democrats
and Republicans to ensure that our
government applies all the tools nec-
essary to counter Iran’s nuclear and
regional ambitions. The gravity of the
moment and the imperative to defini-
tively end Iran’s ability to acquire a
nuclear weapons capability demand
that we remain focused on this effort.

FROM THE AMERICAN
JEWISH COMMITTEE
The AJC issued a statement say-
ing that despite opposing the 2015
JCPOA because of its flaws — no
binding provisions on ballistic mis-
sile development, no focus on Iran’s
destabilizing regional behavior, weak-
nesses in the coverage of the inspec-
tions regime and a dangerous sunset
clause — it had hoped working with
European allies, the deal could be
improved.
According to its statement, the
decision by Trump was “profoundly
regrettable. Despite our many reser-
vations, we had nonetheless hoped to
see the deal ‘fixed,’ not ‘nixed,’ at this
stage of the game.
“We can only hope that this action
by the President, significant as it is,
will not end the effort to find com-
mon ground. The last thing any-
one should want is a wedge driven
between the U.S. and our European
partners, as Iran would inevitably
become an unintended beneficiary.
And given Iran’s current and future
threats to regional and global security,
that should be an outcome no one in
the U.S. or Europe wants.”

FROM AMEINU
“President Trump’s misguided and
ill-conceived announcement weakens
the United States, damages American
credibility with its allies and puts the
entire world at risk,” said Ameinu
National President Kenneth Bob.
“The agreement with Iran was work-

ing, according to American and
Israeli security experts. The deal’s
opponents, while extremely vocal,
have never been able to articulate a
practical alternative to this negoti-
ated settlement,” he added.
“It is our fervent hope that
America’s European allies and Iran
will endeavor to keep the JCPOA alive
and prevent Iran from resuming its
uranium enrichment program that
was halted under the agreement. It’s
difficult to understand how leaving
the JPCOA makes the United States,
Israel or any other country any safer.
Just the opposite, we are now closer
to a war in the Middle East than we
have been for many years.”

FROM THE ISRAEL
POLICY FORUM
“While there is a legitimate debate
to be had about the wisdom of with-
drawing from the Iran deal, President
Trump’s announcement — in clear
opposition to the wishes of the P5
+1 countries, particularly the United
States’ E3 allies Britain, France, and
Germany — is concerning. Any effort
to prevent Iran from becoming a
nuclear power will require buy-in
from American allies, and withdraw-
ing from the nuclear agreement in an
effort to get Iran to agree to tougher
terms going forward is only a viable
tactic if there is a formulated and
multilateral Plan B in place.
“Safeguarding American and Israeli
security cannot be accomplished
if foreign policy is conducted as an
extemporaneous exercise based upon
campaign sloganeering rather than
well-crafted policies. What is critical
now is not only to think through how
best to keep Iran’s nuclear ambitions
in check, but to also prevent the
divisiveness that characterized the
debate in the American Jewish com-
munity during the lead up to the Iran
deal’s formulation. Rather than reliti-
gate previous battles, it is imperative
to focus on what comes next.”
The Israel Policy Forum is a N.Y.-
based American Jewish organization
that works for a negotiated two-state
solution to the Israeli-Palestinian con-
flict.

FROM THE JEWISH
POLICY CENTER
“The Jewish Policy Center applauds
President Trump for withdrawing
from the Joint Comprehensive Plan
of Action (JCPOA). Iran entered the
agreement hiding its prior nuclear
weapons program and unwilling
to allow inspections of its military
facilities and has since possessed
too many centrifuges and too much
heavy water. Furthermore, Iranian

continued on page 10