War offers little promise of a better nuclear deal from Iran
In August 2002, a Paris-based Iranian dissident group revealed that Iran had two undeclared nuclear research facilities in violation of its obligations under the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty.
What followed were 13 years of negotiations, U.N. Security Council resolutions, and sanctions.
In 2013, the Obama administration renewed talks in Oman under the umbrella of the P5+1, the five permanent members of the U.N. Security Council (the U.S., Britain, France, Russia and China) plus Germany and the EU and shortly thereafter Hassan Rouhani, a relative moderate, was elected Iran’s president.
Soon, a framework agreement was reached and inspectors from the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) began monitoring Iran’s program more intensively. It took 20 difficult months from there to reach agreement on the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA).
This was a political agreement, not a formal treaty because President Obama understood that he did not have the votes to get it through Senate ratification. It immediately came under fire from all sides. Hard-liners in Iran believed the sanctions relief provided was insufficient. Internationally, it was opposed by Israel and Saudi Arabia. In America, Republicans launched several lines of attack. Regardless, it entered into force on Jan. 20, 2016.
Beyond the fact that the JCPOA freed up $100 billion in frozen Iranian assets, it did not address Iran’s missile program or its support for proxies in the Middle East. However, the strongest criticism centered on a series of sunset clauses that would allow certain restrictions to expire. In particular, limitations on enrichment expired after 15 years, or 2030.
That said, other restrictions would remain. Continuous surveillance of centrifuge production sites lasted until 2035. Monitoring of mines and mills until 2040. The requirement that Iran notify the IAEA of new facilities would never end and violations would trigger “snap back” sanctions.
The hope was that in the intervening years, one could build on the agreement just as U.S.-Soviet arms control treaties had done (SALT I, SALT II) or that Iran might moderate politically. It was an uncertain future.
After prolonged and withering criticism of the JCPOA by President Trump, he withdrew from the agreement in 2018 and reimposed new “maximum pressure” sanctions even as the other members of the P5+1 tried to salvage the agreement. At the time, it was judged that Iran was in full compliance.
However, neither Trump nor President Biden could strike a new, better deal. Iran asked for guarantees that the U.S. would not withdraw from the agreement again, which neither would promise.
Over the last eight years, Iran has deployed more advanced centrifuges, enriched uranium to at least 60%, and moved much closer to a nuclear weapon than what would have been possible under the JCPOA. That said, the two phases of the war against Iran have clearly set back its program. How much? No one can be sure.
President Trump is now seeking a new deal, with new issues on the table — the Strait of Hormuz, an American blockade and Israeli attacks in Lebanon — complicating matters.
Will a new agreement be multilateral (P5+1) like the JCPOA, given the President’s aversion to multilateralism? Will it stop Iran’s enrichment activities? Will it secure the existing 970 pounds of highly enriched uranium? Will it create an inspection regime as extensive as the JCPOA’s, judged at the time to be unprecedented? What will Iran get?
For all its limitations, the JCPOA set the standard against which President Trump’s efforts will be judged. It was easy for the critics to pick apart the agreement, but now it is their turn to do better.
Given that there don’t seem to be a lot of moderates left in Tehran, that appears to be a very steep hill to climb.
• Keith Peterson, of Lake Barrington, served 29 years as a press and cultural officer for the United States Information Agency and Department of State. He was chief editorial writer of the Daily Herald 1984-86. His book “American Dreams: The Story of the Cyprus Fulbright Commission” is available from Amazon.com.