President Trump’s decision on Thursday to appoint John Bolton as his new national security adviser puts the Iran nuclear deal on life support.
First off, Trump’s tensions with his current national security adviser, H.R. McMaster (Bolton won’t take office until early April) were, in part, focused in McMaster’s reluctance to take a more hawkish line on Iran.
It figures that anyone replacing McMaster would thus be more hawkish towards Tehran in reflection of Trump’s views.
And that leads to the second point: John Bolton is about as hawkish on Iran as any foreign policy intellectual in Washington.
Indeed, Bolton’s attitude towards the Islamic revolutionary republic isn’t centered in mistrust and robust deterrence so much as it is hatred.
Consider, for example, that Bolton has been a long-time advocate for the People’s Mujahedin of Iran group, or MEK, which seeks to overthrow the regime in Tehran.
Previously recognized by the U.S. government as a terrorist organization, the MEK spent vast sums paying high profile U.S. politicians to speak in favor of its cause. Bolton has spoken for the group on numerous occasions and one source tells me he was paid significantly for doing so.
Still, Bolton’s support for the MEK shouldn’t be regarded as wholly contingent on his speaking fees; the passion of Bolton’s speeches in support of the MEK indicate that he has a personal regard for its mission. And the MEK has been aggressively persecuted both inside Iran and in neighboring states like Iraq.
But what about the Iran nuclear deal?
Well, the former U.S. ambassador to the U.N.’s comments here don’t indicate a disbelief in the deal as an end in itself, as much as they do Bolton’s opposition to any action that feasibly makes Iran stronger.
And considering its provision of hundreds of billions of dollars in new business deals to Tehran, the Iran deal can certainly be considered to have made Iran stronger. For that reason, Bolton has repeatedly called on Trump to leave the agreement rather than attempt to salvage it with improvements.
Yes, it’s possible Bolton will now moderate his tone.
If so, perhaps Trump offered Bolton the position in the belief that doing so would make him the perfect messenger to go to Paris and London and persuade the Europeans that Trump will break the deal if he doesn’t get the improvements to it that he seeks.
But I predict that’s not the case.
It is far more likely that Bolton was appointed because he will provide a leading intellectual and bureaucratic force in support of withdrawal. In turn, I submit the Iran deal is now hanging on via European life support.
