U.S. Should Avoid Confrontation with Iran
Controversy has surrounded the Iran nuclear deal since it was signed two years ago. Although the main stipulations of the agreement have been successfully implemented — Iran has so far complied with the restrictions on its nuclear program in return for the lifting of economic sanctions — the agreement continues to generate harsh criticism in both Iran and the United States.
The promise of the deal includes not only rolling back Iran’s nuclear capabilities for the foreseeable future but also paving the way toward a more constructive diplomatic relationship between Washington and Tehran. Its survival, however, depends on complex and turbulent domestic politics in both countries.
Since he started his bid for office, President Trump has been a forceful detractor of the agreement, repeatedly vowing to dismantle it.
During the 2017 presidential campaign, then-candidate Donald Trump was open about his hostility toward Iran and his disdain for the Obama administration’s diplomacy with that country.
Since January, the Trump administration has been engaged in an Iran policy review. President Trump is required by October 15th to decide whether his administration certifies Iran’s compliance with the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, also known as the Iran nuclear deal.
News reports and leaks suggest the review is highly likely to recommend a more confrontational approach to Iran, whether within the framework of the Iranian nuclear deal or by withdrawing from it. Doing so would be the worst course of action if the U.S. seeks to avoid war.
There are four alternatives to U.S. compliance with the deal — but they all are worse than cooperating with Iran and improving U.S.-Iranian relations.
1. Renewing sanctions waived by Iran deal — or creating new ones — would animate opposition from the U.S.’s European allies. Increased economic sanctions are unlikely to succeed in producing policy change in the absence of a clear goal or multinational support. Sanctions are generally an ineffective means of achieving policy change and are only successful 34% of the time.
2. Seeking to thwart Iran by challenging its influence in the Middle East would require the existence of a strong anti-Iranian axis of nations and power players. There is little coherent, effective opposition to Iran in the region. This approach also increases the risks of blowback to U.S. forces in the region, pulling the United States deeper into regional conflicts and require troop increases.
3. So-called regime change from within is a strategy that relies on sanctions and on backing for internal Iranian opposition movements to push for the overthrow of the regime in Tehran. Regime change — whether covert or overt — rarely succeeds in producing a stable, friendly, democratic regime. In Iran, suspicion of foreign influence is considered “political poison,” and there are no suitable candidates to replace the current regime, further compounding this problem.
4. The final policy alternative is direct military action against Iranian nuclear or military facilities. Absent a direct threat to U.S. security, any U.S. military action would likely be illegal in international courts of law. Escalation would be inevitable. Iran would likely retaliate, and all U.S. military bases in the Middle East are within range of Iran’s conventional arsenal, not to mention the possibility of terrorist attacks by Iran’s proxies.
Every one of the options is unlikely to achieve its stated objectives, while at the same time creating an unacceptably high risk of exacerbating the very problems the Trump administration seeks to resolve.
Moreover, cooperation and negotiation with Iran, when possible, will strengthen Iran’s more moderate political factions and weaken hardliners, providing a more hopeful future for U.S.-Iranian relations.
The best approach for long-term international stability is for the U.S. to abide by the terms, help reintegrate Iran into the international economy, keep official channels of communication open, and engage, rather than isolate, the Islamic Republic.
