Horowitz: The Iran Mess - Paying the Price for Trump’s Incoherent Foreign Policy

Tuesday, July 09, 2019

Rob Horowitz, GoLocalWorcester MINDSETTER™

The current dangerous stand-off with Iran is the predictable result of President Trump’s decision to go it alone and withdraw from the Iran Nuclear Agreement, despite the fact that Iran was adhering to the deal and that the rest of the signers, China, Russia, France, United Kingdom and Germany all strongly opposed our decision and stayed in. We are now in the diplomatically untenable position of insisting that Iran continue to comply with the “Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action,” while we refuse to live up to our end of the bargain, punishing this formidable and dangerous Middle Eastern nation with economic sanctions. Recently, we have even upped the ante, individually sanctioning the Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, threatening to sanction Foreign Minister Zarif, the chief negotiator of the nuclear deal, and declaring the Iranian Revolutionary Guard a terrorist organization.

Not surprisingly, Iran has now announced that they are going to begin to exceed the tight limits on enriching uranium contained in the deal and that every 2 months they will announce a new move that will get them closer to producing a nuclear weapon. Coupled with these announcements have been a series of provocative actions, such as the shooting down of an American Drone. These moves are viewed by most foreign policy experts as the Iranians exercising leverage to get the Europeans to provide some sanctions relief--rather than any final decision to abandon the nuclear deal.

The situation is fraught with danger, however, given the possibility that either side could miscalculate and we could end up in an expanding conflict in the Middle East. And this level of danger was avoidable, if President Trump had made the prudent decision to stay in the agreement and work to build on it. The Iranian Nuclear Agreement was keeping Iran from moving forward with its efforts to produce a nuclear weapon and would have done so until it expired in 2030. This is why even national security professionals who opposed the deal before it was signed mainly because they believed it gave Iran too much money by returning their substantial frozen assets and that these new resources would be used to subsidize their designs of territorial expansion, still didn’t think we should withdraw. After all, that "ship had already sailed", making it only common sense these original opponents thought to hold Iran to the commitments they made to unwind their nuclear weapons program--commitments they were living up to.

President Trump never made a coherent case for withdrawing from the deal, resorting to his usual tactics of name-calling and personal attacks. Further, the aggressive policy his administration has employed since the withdrawal is consistent with a strategy of regime change or of getting the Iranians to completely capitulate. This reckless strategy, which was unlikely to work even if well executed, requires a president who is committed to a more expansive role for the United States in the Middle East and who is far more willing to use military force than President Trump. In other words, the administration’s Iranian policy is inconsistent with Trump’s supposed America First approach, based on reducing American’s commitments around the world so we can rebuild at home.

The confused and muddled approach to Iran is a symptom of a foreign policy that is broadly inconsistent, reducing American credibility around the world. The National Security Advisor John Bolton is all too willing to use American military power and Secretary of State Pompeo is not far behind him. President Trump appointed both of these men, despite the fact that any kind of due diligence would have told him that they were not philosophically aligned with his approach to the extent that he has one.

To make matters worse, Trump veers from reckless threats-- that given the absence of follow through most of our adversaries and allies now view as empty--to cravenly coddling dictators. The sad irony is that if Trump gets a deal even a quarter as good as the Iran deal in North Korea, he will sell it as the greatest diplomatic accomplishment of all time.

There is still a way to return to the agreement and as part of this return to get Iran to agree to a new round of negotiations to strengthen the existing deal and to extend it. This would require President Trump to implicitly concede that it was a mistake to leave the deal in the first place. But, it would show a president putting country first. That would not only be good for our nation; it would be good politically for Trump. I am not holding out much hope for this, but it remains by far the best path forward.

Rob Horowitz is a strategic and communications consultant who provides general consulting, public relations, direct mail services and polling for national and state issue organizations, various non-profits and elected officials and candidates. He is an Adjunct Professor of Political Science at the University of Rhode Island.