Over ten years before President Trump ordered an attack on Iran this past February, the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) was signed between the P5+1 states and Iran. The P5+1 group is made up of Germany and the permanent members of the United Nations Security Council: the U.S., the United Kingdom, Russia, China and France. As the permanent members of the UN Security Council, these states are responsible for maintaining international peace. The JCPOA, also known as the Iran Nuclear Deal, was an extraordinary milestone in diplomacy that assured the world greater protection from the devastation of nuclear weapons.
While the Nuclear Deal had some limitations, it prevented the level of uranium enrichment needed to build weapons and introduced surveillance systems into Iran’s infrastructure. In order to reach this deal with Iran, the P5+1 states leveraged crippling sanctions: Iran traded its nuclear weapons development program for economic relief.
Of course, the Iran Nuclear Deal was not perfect. Many critics objected to its narrow focus on nuclear power while neglecting to limit other massively destructive weapons. Some felt that Iran should not be permitted to build its economy back to full strength, while others were concerned that the agreement was too temporary, given that parts of the deal were set to expire only 15 years after its signing in 2015.
In 2018, during his first term, Trump withdrew from the Iran Nuclear Deal. What he failed to realize was that despite its shortcomings, the deal’s narrow focus allowed it to eliminate the biggest threat to international security: nuclear weapons. Additionally, Trump ignored the Obama administration’s hopes that the deal’s time limit would allow for future renegotiation.
According to the White House, there are several reasons for the operations in Iran, the majority of which were behind the withdrawal of the U.S. from the JCPOA. Iran’s ballistic missile operations, the program that the JCPOA excluded, are one target. Trump would rather throw aside statesmanship and jump headlong into war. Already, this aggression has produced poorer results than diplomacy might have. Iran has weathered the joint U.S.-Israel forces to maintain significant missile and drone capabilities. However, intelligence from the Pentagon and misgivings from senior US intelligence officer Joe Kent suggest that Iran did not have plans to strike unless attacked first. Finally, Iran does not have intercontinental missiles which could reach the U.S., nor will it in the near future. Not only have the strikes been so far unsuccessful and expensive, but they have proven entirely unnecessary in the first place.
Another target is Iran’s nuclear program, which has been re-initiated since the U.S. withdrew from the deal. While a couple of stockpiles of uranium were badly damaged in U.S. attacks, it is unclear how much was destroyed and whether there is a significant reserve in other facilities. Given that it would be almost impossible to destroy Iran’s enriched uranium stockpile without a ground invasion, Trump’s stated goal of preventing Iran’s development of nuclear weapons seems unachievable.
In the past, Iran used the threat of obtaining a nuclear weapon to create a diplomatic platform. In return for not augmenting its military capabilities, Iran would be released from economic sanctions. Now that the U.S. has shown itself to be unreliable in sticking to its commitments, nuclear armament has likely become more appealing to Iran as a defensive option.
The evidence seems to suggest that the war with Iran is also driven by Israeli interests. Staunch opposers to the JCPOA from the beginning, the Israeli government has argued that it gave Iran too much freedom to build influence in the Middle East. It’s not just President Netanyahu pushing Trump towards war; the Israeli lobby in the United States poured millions of dollars into advertising against the JCPOA. Though Israel may fear Iranian influence in the Middle East, the United States should be wary of fighting on behalf of a country that does not have American security interests in mind.
The United States’ actions against Iran are not only ill-advised but illegal. Domestically, Congress is the only part of the government with the power to declare war, which it has not done. Trump is not the first president to take military action without Congressional approval, but given the unpopularity of the war, it is cause for concern. Internationally, the strikes violate the UN charter, which states that no two members will use force against each other to resolve a conflict.
Trump has agitated an adversary. He is antagonizing Iran rather than pursuing peace and statesmanship. His actions are likely to push an insecure Iran to sprint towards nuclear weapons as they begin to feel that it is required to defend their country. Regardless of a withdrawal from the JCPOA, a continued pursuit of diplomacy would have been more beneficial. The war against Iran is one more reckless move in striking contrast with a long history of American presidents who believed that the sovereignty of other states was something to be respected, not conquered or torn down.
