1. Everyone who cares about the wellbeing of the Iranian people and the credibility of American leadership can get behind this idea: Trump should sell grain to Iran.
bloomberg.com/view/articles/…
bloomberg.com/view/articles/…
2. Fact 1: Iran has made strides in boosting its agricultural output, but still has a significant reliance on imports for key grains. The US is among the countries selling to Iran under sanctions exemptions. In August, Iran was the #1 destination for American soybeans. 
3. Fact 2: The Trump administration is working from the Reagan playbook when it comes to its Iran policy. @mike_giglio's reporting helps illustrate this. Pompeo cites Reagan at length in his recent @ForeignAffairs piece. It's the 1980s baby!
buzzfeednews.com/article/mikegi…
buzzfeednews.com/article/mikegi…
4. Now, compare these two quotes from Reagan (1), during his stint as a political commentator prior to running for President, and Trump (2) a few weeks ago. We see the same "maximum pressure" ethos. The US should hit the economy and make the adversary concede.
5. But here is the thing--when Reagan became president, he actually changed his tune and made *humanitarian trade* a cornerstone of his policy to confront the USSR. He quickly ended the grain embargo imposed by Carter to punish the Soviets for their invasion of Afghanistan.
6. Reagan ended the embargo for three reasons:
-Allies were not on board, so USSR was still getting grain from elsewhere
-US farmers were hurting due to a weak economy and lower exports
-Reagan wanted to prove he could deal with "a country our critics say won’t deal with us"
-Allies were not on board, so USSR was still getting grain from elsewhere
-US farmers were hurting due to a weak economy and lower exports
-Reagan wanted to prove he could deal with "a country our critics say won’t deal with us"
7. Importantly, Reagan took these steps against the advice of many key advisers, who “had the intention of waging all-out cold economic warfare, with the objective of causing the collapse of, or regime change in the Soviet Union.” Sound familiar?
8. On #Iran, Trump faces a remarkably similar dilemma to that faced by Reagan:
-Allies are not on board with the maximum pressure policy and are even seeking to circumvent it
-US farmers are hurting because of the trade war with China
-Trump desperately wants to "make a deal"
-Allies are not on board with the maximum pressure policy and are even seeking to circumvent it
-US farmers are hurting because of the trade war with China
-Trump desperately wants to "make a deal"
9. Add to this the growing international concern that the administration is falling short in its protections of humanitarian trade, leading to shortages in medicine and foodstuffs in #Iran, and it is clear that a new approach is needed. US credibility is on the line.
10. Trump ought to follow Reagan's USSR example and the detail of National Security Decision Directive 75 which included a specific provision for “mutually beneficial trade—without Western subsidization or creation of Western dependence—in non-strategic areas, such as grains.”
11. Plus, Europe should actively seek US engagement in grain sales, as this is the best way to ensure the US takes the measures necessary to keep banking and logistics channels open for this crucial trade. To date, European requests for sanctions waivers have been rejected.
12. Clearly, the US + Iran would remain adversaries. But both governments have an interest in mitigating direct harm to the Iranian people, and in leaving the door open for improved relations in the future. An expanded trade in agricultural commodities would achieve just that.
