Iranian issue and Trump

The history of the issue

Iran’s nuclear ambitions were fueled by the bloody war with Iraq after the Islamic Revolution and Israel’s possession of nuclear weapons. The intensification of its nuclear program in the early '90s led to the imposition of harsh sanctions, added to the post-revolutionary ones.

However, the real shift began after the September 11 attacks, when George Bush’s administration started a series of wars in the region, which prompted Iran to escalate its nuclear program.

The idea of invading Iran also existed, but by 2006, after the prolonged wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, it was no longer supported under the "late" Bush administration. Under Obama, it was completely abandoned because the focus had to be on putting out the fires and dealing with the global crisis.

After the Arab Spring, the rise of ISIS, and the escalation of the regional crisis, there was a need to stabilize the situation, involve Iran in more responsible behavior, and prevent the spread of new conflicts. In 2013, moderate president Hassan Rouhani took power in Iran, and all doors for an agreement were opened. 

The 2015 nuclear deal between Iran, the U.S., the EU, Russia, and China set restrictions on Iran’s nuclear program and allowed for the gradual lifting of sanctions. Although Israel and American evangelicals criticized the deal as “too soft,” it did reduce tensions, stabilized the region for several years, and made Iran more “pro-Western.”

By the way, even Ukraine started planning a shared future — in May 2016, Pavlo Klimkin visited Iran, where they received support for Ukraine’s territorial integrity, and the countries agreed to expand their partnership.

Why did Trump cancel the deal?

In 2017, Trump unilaterally withdrew the U.S. from the nuclear deal, driven by a desire to dismantle anything associated with Obama, pressure from evangelical circles and pro-Israel lobbyists, and a belief in a “better deal.” At the time, ISIS was on the defensive, and it seemed like a perfect opportunity to push forward and claim a major victory.

Of course, everything didn’t go according to plan, and the consequences became quite evident right away:

1. Iran returned to covertly exporting oil, mainly to China. 

2. Iran’s cooperation with North Korea in the field of nuclear technologies became more active. 

3. Iran’s relations with China and Russia deepened significantly, which we felt in 2022 — firsthand.

By 2025, the rupture of the nuclear deal looks like an absolute absurdity that brought nothing but harm. And now, Trump has decided to backpedal. 

But there’s a problem. While some business and political circles in Iran are interested in a new deal, the situation is much more complicated than in 2015. Rouhani is no longer president and has fallen from grace. Despite Israel’s success against Hezbollah and the fall of Assad’s regime, Houthi forces are still operational, and Shiite proxies in Iraq have grown stronger. Iran can still relatively easily block trade in the Persian Gulf, and invading Iran still carries huge risks, especially without a land base in Iraq.

The search for allies to pressure Iran into a deal has also failed. Russia has no interest in such a deal and will actively hinder the negotiation process. The full return of Iranian oil to the market would mean significant losses for Russia. Netanyahu’s government would gladly engage in another war to preserve its power, but Trump effectively excluded Israel from the negotiations, out of a reluctance to upset key Arab countries in the region, who want to neutralize Iran without a major war, the course of which is unpredictable.

The 2015 deal was made under unique historical conditions. It was easy to tear up, but rebuilding it is almost impossible.

And given how quickly our world is descending into chaos, a U.S. war against Iran — even in a highly disadvantageous configuration — seems increasingly likely. After all, with such "successful" policies in every direction, Trump may soon need a “small victorious war.”

Source

About the author. Yuriy Bohdanov, publicist, expert in strategic communications in business, public administration and politics

The editorial team does not necessarily endorse the views expressed by blog authors.