The best illustration of the incoherence of the
Trump administration’s strategy toward Iran came last week in a White
House news release. “There is little doubt that even before the deal’s
existence, Iran was violating its terms,” it read. The White House has not subsequently explained how a country can violate the terms of a deal before that deal existed.
This
is not the only example of incoherence. When President Trump announced
last month that he had called off military strikes against Iran, he said
it was because he learned that an estimated 150 Iranians would have died in those attacks. Instead he has further tightened economic sanctions against Iran. The sanctions being
levied are having a “massive and crippling” effect on the country, said
Jeffrey Sachs, an economist who has studied the effects of such
measures. “Sanctions like these are known to cause a significant rise in
mortality,” he noted. “Given the size of Iran’s population, around 81
million, this is sure to be far larger than 150 deaths.”
And
keep in mind, the people who would have died in the military strikes
probably would have been Iranian soldiers. Those who are now dying
because of sanctions are newborn babies, mothers, the elderly and sick.
An academic study points
out that sanctions produce widespread drug shortages, and that those
who suffer most are “patients struggling with cancer, multiple
sclerosis, blood disorders, and other serious conditions.”
The
Trump administration has created a humanitarian crisis in Iran and a
geopolitical crisis in the Middle East with no strategy for resolving
either. The Iran pact had
forced Tehran to commit that it would never develop nuclear weapons, to
ship away 98 percent of its enriched uranium, destroy its plutonium
reactor, and agree to limits and intrusive inspections for 10 to 25
years. The international inspectors — as well as the intelligence
agencies of the major powers — confirmed that Iran was adhering to the deal.
By
withdrawing from the pact, the Trump administration has allowed Iran to
start moving away from these limits. For example, Tehran had agreed
that it would not develop more than 300 kilograms of low-enriched
uranium until 2030. It had kept within those parameters since 2015. Iran
exceeded that limit last week, justifying its move by pointing out that the United States had itself abrogated the pact.
The
United States’ actions toward Iran have also created a rift within the
Western alliance. Europe had been strongly supportive of Washington’s
Iran policy, and the joint pressure had worked well in bringing Tehran
to the negotiating table. Now the Europeans are in open revolt
against Washington’s unilateralism and have even made efforts to
establish an alternative payment mechanism to the dollar for trade with
Iran.
Other
nations in the Middle East sense Iran’s weakness and are moving to take
advantage. Israeli officials have privately briefed Western diplomats
that they might decide to strike at Iran’s existing nuclear facilities
in the near future. Saudi Arabia has celebrated the U.S. campaign of
maximum pressure as it pursues a broad anti-Iranian policy on several
fronts.
As the noose tightens around Iran, it
has been reacting with incremental actions by its own military or, more
often, associated militias — from Yemen to the Persian Gulf. Each of
these then produces a response from Saudi Arabia or the United States.
In other words, Trump has sharply ratcheted up regional tensions with no good plan for resolving them.
The
Trump administration is hoping for capitulation from the Iranians, in
which they will return to the negotiating table and accept a deal far
more onerous than the one they signed in 2015. It’s possible that this
will happen but much more likely that this regional cold war will get
more tense and the likelihood of miscalculation or accidental war will
rise.
Even
if there were some kind of temporary Iranian concessions, born out of
desperation, they will surely not last. Wounded, embittered powers
always find a way to return with a vengeance. The Trump administration
seems to forget that the Iranian civilization has been a major player in
the Middle East for thousands of years. It has a population more
than double the size of Iraq’s and is more strategically located. It
has a strong tradition of nationalism and statecraft and a history of
resisting foreign domination.
The path to
stability in the Middle East does not lie in strangling Iran. That will
only sow the seeds of resentment and revanchism, creating a more
unstable region and one in which the United States will find itself
mired for decades. Alas, this is the path on which we find ourselves
moving.
No comments:
Post a Comment