President Trump will decide before May 12 whether to withdraw from the Iran nuclear agreement, instead of certifying to Congress that remaining in the deal is in the interests of the U.S.
Trump correctly views the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action as a very bad deal. But at this point, withdrawal would add one more mistake to the litany of errors in U.S. diplomacy regarding Iran.
Trump should instead welcome French President Emmanuel Macron’s offer to join him in responding to Iranian threats that the JCPOA fails to address: its acquisition of nuclear weapons after the JCPOA expires, its intercontinental ballistic missile program, its support of terrorism, and its foreign interventions.
Much of the agreement’s damage cannot be undone. The four U.N. Security Council resolutions that forced Iran to negotiate have already been revoked. Withdrawal would only deprive the U.S. of the one vehicle by which they could be reinstated.
Some $150 billion have been returned to Iran and used to support its illegal objectives. The $1.5 billion shamefully transferred in cash has been distributed to Iran’s corrupt leaders.
Nor would withdrawal help ensure that Iran never develops nuclear weapons. The ten years remaining in the deal give the U.S. and its allies time to prepare for the speedy breakout Iran may undertake. And Iran’s commitment in the JCPOA, never to develop a nuclear weapon, provides a moral and legal basis for at least holding Iran to account, whereas U.S. withdrawal would provide Iran its own excuse to withdraw.
Furthermore, U.S. withdrawal from the nuclear pact will do nothing to end Iran’s ballistic missile program, its support for terrorist groups, or its foreign interventions. Withdrawal will not alter the disgraceful fact that the U.S. agreed to lift the U.N. Security Council that prohibited these activities.
Trump is properly skeptical of the French proposal. President Macron said nothing in public about how he proposes to convince Iran to agree to his agenda. Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, President Hassan Rouhani, and Foreign Minister Javad Zarif have raucously refused to consider any extension or amendment of the JCPOA.
The effective response to this challenge is leadership, not withdrawal. By agreeing to stay in the deal the U.S. would have greater influence in convincing its European allies to impose multilateral sanctions on Iran, to support states threatened by Iran, to act effectively against Iranian-sponsored aggression, and ultimately to declare Iran in violation of the JCPOA, thereby reinstating the Security Council resolutions revoked by the agreement.
It is simply untrue that withdrawal would enhance U.S. authority to impose sanctions on Iran. The JCPOA suspends “nuclear” sanctions only. It does not prevent the U.S. and its allies from imposing sanctions based on Iran’s non-nuclear activities. Iran itself claims that the agreement has no bearing on any non-nuclear issue. It cannot therefore credibly claim the deal prevents non-nuclear sanctions.
The Algiers Accords, too, contained a U.S. commitment to lift economic sanctions; but, when Iran’s proxies resumed seizing hostages and attacked U.S. and allied vessels in the Gulf, President Ronald Reagan resumed imposing sanctions. The JCPOA cannot be read implicitly to license Iran’s illegal non-nuclear activities.
Having England, France, and Germany join the U.S. in a sanctions program, and suspending all investments, would be more effective than unilateral U.S. action. These measures could alone force Iran to negotiate; the country is already reeling from inflation, unemployment, and economic stagnation.
U.S. allies could also be convinced to join in countering Iranian support for terror and interventions by arming and assisting states targeted by Iran. Withdrawal is no substitute for the moral and economic pressure such support would place on Iran’s radical agenda.
If all else fails, Trump should lead an effort to end the untenable immunity the U.S. and other states have afforded Iranian territory. U.S. forces in Iraq failed to hold Iran accountable for the deaths of hundreds of American soldiers killed by Iranian-supplied rockets that penetrated armored personnel carriers. Iran also supplied rockets to Afghan groups to enable them to kill U.S. and other allied forces, without any penalty. Iranian aggression through surrogates cannot effectively be curbed without holding Iran directly accountable. The single occasion when the U.S. took military action against Iran in the late 1980s ended Iranian mining and attacks on U.S. vessels in the Persian Gulf.
To counter Iran successfully requires strength, not merely the symbolic action of withdrawing from the JCPOA. Trump should lead U.S. allies in a comprehensive effort to force Iran to alter its strategic calculations. That policy is the best hope for avoiding the major confrontation that will ultimately result if Iran is allowed to continue on its present course.
Abraham Sofaer was the legal advisor at the U.S. Department of State from 1985 to 1990 and led negotiations with Iran in The Hague during his service. He is a Shultz Senior Fellow at the Hoover Institution at Stanford and author of Taking On Iran.
