Brian M Downing
Candidate Trump promised to break from the JCPOA and press hard on Iran. He asserted that Tehran was expanding its power in the Middle East, supporting terrorism, and continuing to develop nuclear weapons. President Trump has kept his word in this regard. The US has left the JCPOA, imposed sanctions, and backed Israeli strikes on Iranian and Hisbollah positions in Syria and the Saudi war In Yemen as well.
Much has happened in the last year to call into question the administration’s Iran policy. Is a change of course possible in this administration? In the next?
The US intelligence community
Last week, heads of intelligence agencies testified before Congress that Iran was not developing nuclear weapons. (This was an update of a similar assessment in 2007.) Their simultaneous assessment that N Korea will never give up nuclear weapons constitutes a rebuke of two of the administration’s main foreign policy positions.
This public disagreement underscores the security bureaus’ unease if not alarm with the president’s disdain for military and intelligence experts, his pronounced erratic qualities, and the policies themselves. Trump changes his mind suddenly and without consulting foreign policy bureaus. He’s summarily, disrespectfully, and without adequate explanation dismissed Rex Tillerson, HR McMaster, John Kelly, and James Mattis.
National policy rests uncertainly in the hands of the president and his inner circle, perhaps especially son-in-law Jared Kushner. None are well grounded in world affairs. Only one, former Congressman Mike Pompeo, has military experience. He served 5 years in peacetime before entering politics.
Saudi Arabia
One of the driving forces behind the Iran policy is Saudi Arabia. The kingdom injects billions of dollars into US defense industries and owns considerable business assets here as well.
The acting king, Mohammad bin Salman, is reigning under a darkening cloud of uncertain duration. He, according to US intelligence experts, is responsible for the murder of dissident Jamal Khashoggi and the ongoing coverup. His war in Yemen is a military stalemate and a humanitarian disaster. He appears to have unsettling personal qualities and worrisome potentials.
Israel
The US intelligence assessment on Iran’s nuclear weapons program parallels Israeli findings. General and retired Mossad chief Meir Dagan (1945-2016) once directed a program of assassinating Iranian nuclear scientists. He’s no dove. Sagan called PM Netanyahu’s claims of Iran’s nuclear threat “bullshit”. Not a plausible interpretation, just “bullshit”.
Uzi Eilam, a retired brigadier general and former director of Israel’s atomic energy program, argued that it was unclear Iran intended to go past “dual use” stages and embark upon a weapons program.
Netanyahu is beset with legal troubles stemming from gifts bestowed upon him by foreign supporters. Furthermore, he is being challenged by a former army chief of staff. Benny Gantz, like many ranking figures in the military and security bureaus, is uncomfortable with Netanyahu’s agenda and the ultra-nationalist/religious bases of his government. They see his agenda as undermining the nation’s founding beliefs and possibly moving the country toward a less democratic and more intolerant form of government.
Another former Mossad chief, Tamir Pardo, believes Netanyahu and his movement are leading the country toward deep internal conflict.
Foreign powers
The effort to press Iran into the 2015 nuclear deal enjoyed widespread international support. Not so Washington’s new course. The Trump administration’s assertions of Iran’s nuclear program, increasing influence in the Middle East, and support for terrorism are not shared outside Washington, Riyadh, and Jerusalem.
Few countries are willingly joining the administration’s sanctions. Many countries are successfully pressing the US for waivers. Other are working with Iran to get around the strictures of the dollar system.
A change of course, again?
Despite the setbacks, the Trump administration is unlikely to fundamentally alter its Iran policy. The intelligence assessments, Mohammad bin Salman’s ruthlessness, opposition inside Israel, and lack of support abroad are not strong enough to effect change. Congress is too mindful of Saudi and Israeli pressures and the American public is more attentive to partisan politics than world affairs.
The administration and its allies in Riyadh and Washington will press on and try to goad Iran into a misstep. Israel is continuing to hit Iranian and Hisbollah targets in Syria. The war in Yemen continues despite qualms in Congress. Attacks inside Iran take place occasionally, some tied to outside backing. A deadly fire at an Iranian research facility over the weekend may be the most recent incident.
American policy toward Iran shifts dramatically from administration to administration. Though this may offer hope for better ties after 2020, Tehran may think American policies are unduly and unalterably shaped by foreign pressures. Some administrations more than others of course.
The Bush administration rejected Tehran’s 2003 effort for rapprochement, despite Secretary of State Powell’s objection, and the Trump administration more recently walked out of the JCPOA, despite objections from cabinet members. The mullahs and generals may well conclude that no enduring rapprochement with Washington is possible. Unfortunately, realist observers are drawing the same conclusion.
© 2019 Brian M Downing
Brian M Downing is a national security analyst who’s written for outlets across the political spectrum. He studied at Georgetown University and the University of Chicago, and did post-graduate work at Harvard’s Center for International Affairs. Thanks as ever to Susan Ganosellis.