By INU Staff

INU - Earlier this month, United States President Donald Trump decertified Iran’s compliance with the 2015 nuclear deal. He announced a new strategy and gave hope that the Iran issue would be dealt with appropriately and effectively.

The presidents before him passed the buck on Iran and its nuclear ambitions, but it is hoped that the buck stops with the current administration.

However, we must realise one fundamental point about the nuclear deal. It is widely explained that the nuclear deal is to restrain Iran. But some, including Ted R. Bromund - a senior research fellow in The Heritage Foundation’s Thatcher Center for Freedom, believe that the 2015 deal was actually a way to restrain the US.

Bromund explains that the nuclear deal is the “most poorly” drawn up agreement because it gives Iran immediate sanctions relief in return for potential good behaviour in the future. Once the sanctions were lifted, it immediately became so much more difficult for them to ever be reimposed because European cooperation will be needed. Considering the massive wave of Iranian money heading into European industries, cooperation from EU leaders is not very likely.

The nuclear agreement took away all means for enforcing it.

Explaining why he believes the nuclear deal is a way of restraining the US, Bromund said: “Now, the people who negotiated the Iran deal weren’t dumb. So why did they negotiate a bad deal? Simple: The Iran nuclear deal wasn’t intended primarily to control Iran’s nuclear program. It was intended to eliminate Iran’s nuclear program as an issue in U.S. politics. The idea of a deal to control Iran’s nuclear program never made much sense. If Iran genuinely wanted a purely civilian nuclear program, we wouldn’t need a deal to control it.”

He gave the example of Finland which complies with IAEA inspections without complaint.

Bromund believes that the US wanted Iran as a partner in the Middle East, as acknowledged by Obama at the beginning of 2014. However, Obama realised that while everyone was concentrating on the Iranian nuclear program, there would be no fruition so he got Iran to sign a deal that would take the focus away from the nuclear program.
“And that is what happened. We’re not focusing on Iran‘s conduct any more. We’re focusing on the nuclear deal itself – which comes equipped with one of Obama’s patented straw men, that anyone who opposes the deal is a warmonger.”

Bromund continues: “Nonsense. The one thing the Sunni powers – led by the Saudis – don’t want is to see Iran become “a very successful regional power.” That’s what’s happening in Iraq, Syria, and Lebanon. By feeding Sunni fears, the nuclear deal sets the stage for a big regional war. The problem is that, thanks to the deal, the U.S.’s best tool for restraining Iran without war – sanctions – lies in ruins.”

The one thing that the US should have been able to use is sanctions. But they were lifted and it is now next to impossible to go back. However, it is much more important to oppose Iranian influence across the Middle East. This will take Iran’s power away.