Why are we headed for a blowup with Iran? It began when Trump scrapped the nuclear deal




Tensions in the volatile U.S.-Iran relationship are increasing, and the two sides are ever closer to the possibility of a direct military confrontation since President Donald Trump condemned what was almost certainly an Iranian mine attack disabling two oil tankers in the Gulf of Oman last week. A serious and sustained conflict isn't inevitable, but the odds have increased.

How did we get here and, more troubling, exactly where are we going? Amidst all the hype, spin and storytelling from both sides, here are some harsh truths about the Trump administration and its Iranian adversaries.

The Iranian regime is authoritarian, ideological and repressive, a serial human rights abuser and regional troublemaker. But we now find ourselves in a dangerous situation largely as a result of a great unraveling begun by the Trump administration's unilateral decision last year to withdraw from the 2015 Iran nuclear agreement.

The accord - known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) - was flawed, to be sure, and didn't address Iran's aggressive regional behavior or its ballistic missile programs. Even so, it was still a highly functional arms control agreement that imposed significant constraints on Iran's nuclear program for at least for a decade or more.

'Maximum pressure' and no Plan B

Campaigning hard against the agreement, candidate Trump vowed to renegotiate or leave what he deemed the worst agreement ever negotiated. Then as president, he pulled out of the agreement and launched his "maximum pressure" campaign. The administration reimposed sanctions on banking and petrochemicals and, in the past several months, has made a major effort to reduce Iran's lifeblood - its oil exports - to zero. As intended, all of this has wreaked havoc on the Iranian economy.

Look to Reagan: On Iran tanker attack, Donald Trump and Mike Pompeo should follow his lead

Not surprisingly, the regime, which the Iranian foreign minister quipped had a Ph.D. in sanctions busting, signaled through mine attacks on six oil tankers in the past month that it had options, too. Within hours of Thursday's attacks, oil prices spiked. No matter how egregious the regime's behavior in other areas, pulling out of the JCPOA without a Plan B other than "maximum pressure" has more than any other factor brought us where we are today.

Tensions rising but caution on both sides

With no anchor stabilizing relations between Washington and Tehran, and mistrust at an all-time high, the dynamic has become one of drift and deterioration. Given the bellicose rhetoric on both sides since the start of the Trump presidency, it's stunning that there hasn't been a clash already in Syria, Iraq or the Persian Gulf. But that impulsiveness in words has not been reflected in deeds, revealing the caution with which both Trump and Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei exercise in order to avoid a major escalation - at least so far.

Trump has repeatedly expressed his desire to meet with Iran's leadership and, given his campaign promises, wants to avoid another costly war in the Middle East - despite his hard-line national security adviser John Bolton, who would like the regime bombed if not overthrown.

Khamenei is determined to put regime survival ahead of all else, particularly given his advanced age, health concerns and an unresolved succession. He is wary of the unpredictability and uncertainty that would accompany a major war with America. He must also contend with an Iranian Revolutionary Guards Corps itching for a fight.

And so Khamenei and Trump test each other - Trump piling on sanctions and deploying naval and air assets to the region; Khamenei signaling through Revolutionary Guards attacks against oil tankers (sparing U.S. targets so far) that Iran has a vote, too. There has been no casus belli serious enough to trigger a direct attack by either side.

Does Trump have an Iran endgame?

A major escalation can't be counted out, however, largely because there is little to stabilize the situation. The Iranian economy is hurting badly with little sign of serious relief from well-intentioned Europeans who would like to provide it but are worried about violating and getting slapped with U.S. sanctions. Oil revenue has been severely cut, and Iran's inclination to wait Trump out is not really a strategy or a means to relieve the pressure. Iran has abided by the nuclear accord's major provisions but also has threatened to begin higher-level enrichment of uranium unless it gets some economic relief.

As for the Trump administration, its endgame strategy is unclear, as is whether there even is one. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo says regime change by military means isn't the goal. But Bolton seems to be angling for regime change through political and economic pressure - a seemingly fantastical goal. Trump would clearly like a negotiation, but even he admitted in light of recent tensions that the time is not right for a deal. The administration publicly asserts that its goal is to get Iran back to the negotiating table to fashion some new agreement, but is it prepared to make the serious concessions Iran would demand? Is Tehran even interested?

No Trump plan: A year after ditching Iran nuclear deal, what is Trump's Iran policy? Saber rattling?

At a minimum, the two sides are badly in need of a hotline or channel to deconflict their military forces in the region in order to preempt a serious escalation. During the Obama administration, the Iranian negotiators reportedly rejected such a proposal. And they may not agree now, seeing it as a sign of weakness when they want to keep the pressure on.

The cruel reality is that it may well require more tension, perhaps even a U.S.-Iranian clash, to convince each side that the situation has become too dangerous to continue. But once direct conflict begins, it might be impossible to stop. Sadly, the headlines of the U.S.-Iranian crisis look bad, but the trend lines look even worse. Washington and Tehran seem headed sooner or later for a blowup, and one would be hard-pressed right now to figure out how to preempt it.

Aaron David Miller, a distinguished fellow at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars and a former State Department adviser and Middle East negotiator, is the author of "The End of Greatness: Why America Can't Have (and Doesn't Want) Another Great President." Follow him on Twitter: @aarondmiller2

You can read diverse opinions from our Board of Contributors and other writers on the Opinion front page, on Twitter @usatodayopinion and in our daily Opinion newsletter. To respond to a column, submit a comment to letters@usatoday.com.

This article originally appeared on USA TODAY: Why are we headed for a blowup with Iran? It began when Trump scrapped the nuclear deal

COMMENTS

More Related News

AP FACT CHECK: False claims flood Trump-Biden debate
AP FACT CHECK: False claims flood Trump-Biden debate

President Donald Trump unleashed a torrent of fabrications and fear-mongering in a belligerent debate with Joe Biden, at one point claiming the U.S. death toll would have been 10 times higher under the Democrat because he wanted open borders in the pandemic. Biden preached no such thing. Biden stumbled on the record at times as the angry words flew from both men on the Cleveland stage.

'Will you shut up, man?' 5 takeaways from the slugfest between Donald Trump and Joe Biden in Cleveland

At Tuesday's debate, Donald Trump repeatedly interrupted Joe Biden. At one point, the Democratic candidate asked Trump, "Will you shut up, man?"

Debate Takeaways: An acrid tone from the opening minute
Debate Takeaways: An acrid tone from the opening minute
  • World
  • 2020-09-30 05:31:19Z

After more than a year of circling each other, Republican President Donald Trump and Democratic challenger Joe Biden met on the debate stage Tuesday night in Ohio. Trump's supporters may have been cheered by his frontal assault.

Chaotic first debate: Taunts overpower Trump, Biden visions
Chaotic first debate: Taunts overpower Trump, Biden visions
  • World
  • 2020-09-30 05:29:53Z

The first debate between President Donald Trump and Democratic challenger Joe Biden deteriorated into bitter taunts and near chaos Tuesday night as Trump repeatedly interrupted his opponent with angry - and personal - jabs that sometimes overshadowed the sharply different visions each man has for a nation facing historic crises. In the most tumultuous presidential debate in recent memory, Trump refused to condemn white supremacists who have supported him, telling one such group known as Proud Boys to "stand back, stand by." There were also heated clashes over the president's handling of the pandemic, the integrity of the election results, deeply personal attacks about Biden's family and...

NY Times: Trump paid $750 in US income taxes in 2016, 2017
NY Times: Trump paid $750 in US income taxes in 2016, 2017

President Donald Trump paid just $750 in federal income taxes the year he ran for president and in his first year in the White House, according to a report Sunday in The New York Times. Trump, who has fiercely guarded his tax filings and is the only president in modern times not to make them public, paid no federal income taxes in 10 of the past 15 years. The details of the tax filings complicate Trump's description of himself as a shrewd and patriotic businessman, revealing instead a series of financial losses and income from abroad that could come into conflict with his responsibilities as president.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked with *

Cancel reply

Comments

Top News: Latin America