“Let’s Make a Deal,” the television show that launched in the 1960s, is still on the air today. The mindset in that show’s title is just as venerable in diplomacy, and so making a deal has been prime directive of the State Department through many administrations, including that of Secretary of State Rex Tillerson whom President Trump has just fired. “Let’s make deal” could also be Trump’s motto, for he cherishes his self-image as a deal-maker.
But making a deal for the sake of making a deal isn’t ideal, and we believe that CIA Director Mike Pompeo, nominated to replace Tillerson, understands that. He is more single-minded about America’s interests and the substance of foreign and national security policy than he is in getting a handshake across a negotiating table.
Diplomacy and geopolitics aren’t about making deals. They are about advancing the national interest. Sometimes that means making a deal, but doing it effectively always requires a willingness to walk away.
The Trump administration is looking currently at one deal they inherited and one potential deal, with Iran and North Korea, respectively, that require Pompeo’s cold-eyed pragmatism and focus on outcomes. America’s national interest may or may not be served by the preservation of the Iran nuclear deal, which the new secretary of state is known to detest.
By providing cover for the mullahs and delivering them pallets of cash, the Iran deal could backfire, and make a nuclear-armed Iran more likely. We believe that the nuclear deal can be a good tool. We’ve called for Trump to keep the deal and use it as leverage, not only over Iran, but also over our allies in Europe, who are desperate for a deal, and at times less helpful in applying pressure on Iran.
Former President Barack Obama didn’t see the Iran deal as a tool of American national interest and global security, but as a Holy Grail in itself. He bent the rules and the truth to make the deal. It wasn’t a means to an end, in his eyes, but an end in itself. The end, though, ought to be preventing a nuclear Iran. Pompeo, we believe, sees this clearly.
The danger is that Pompeo hates the deal, which is reasonable enough, and thus may not see it as tool of leverage. We hope that Pompeo’s tendency towards pragmatism means he’ll hold the Iran deal for what it is: something that is good to the extent it prevents a nuclear Iran, and something that is bad to the extent it enables one.
Replacing Tillerson with Pompeo could prove crucial also as the administration goes into talks with North Korea. While any administration would be thrilled to “get a deal” with the famously isolated North Korean regime, that cannot be the goal. The Clinton administration cut a deal with Pyongyang and we have been living with the malign consequences ever since.
The Trump administration can’t repeat that mistake. The goal is to knock North Korea off its current path towards a nuclear-tipped intercontinental ballistic missile that could reach the mainland United States. North Korea’s regime obviously doesn’t share our goal. The only way to achieve it is to go to the table willing to walk away.
Our State Department’s job is to advance American interests overseas. Every other aim is contingent on this aim. The most pressing concern in geopolitics today is keeping nuclear weapons out of the hands of evil regimes. Amid the chaos of the world and of the State Department in flux, we need a secretary who stays focused on this outcome. Both the Iran deal and the North Korea talks reach crises in May, and by replacing Tillerson with Pompeo, Trump is putting in place the tough-minded team he wants around him to take on those enormous challenges. The move looks and feels right, creating policy coherence and a partnership between two men who have developed a personal rapport over the past 15 months.
