#OTD in 2018, President Trump announced that his administration was withdrawing the U.S. from the Iran nuclear deal.
It was a massive gamble. It was a failed gamble. But should be an instructive gamble. 🧵👇
2/ Trump had criticized the agreement on the campaign trail, but held off for over a year from pulling the plug, in part because senior members of his team believed the deal continued to serve U.S. non-proliferation interests.
3/ In Autumn 2017, Trump refused to certify the agreement - though still holding off withdrawal.
"We will not continue down a path whose predictable conclusion is more violence, more chaos, the very real threat of Iran’s nuclear breakout", he said.
More on that shortly.
4/ By May 2018, and despite months of negotiations with the Europeans that culminated in visits by all three E3 leaders arguing in favour of building on the existing deal rather than jettisoning it entirely, Trump withdrew anyway.
5/ Decision made, the Trump administration proceeded with what came to be known as the "maximum pressure" strategy, primarily associated with restoration of pre-JCPOA sanctions, then their expansion and layering - some 1,500 or so, across every major sector of Iran's economy.
6/ The impact was real. Iran's economy, already blighted by mismanagement and corruption, now saw its trade limited and key exports like oil drop sharply. GDP growth went negative - though by mid-2020 it was stabilizing the tailspin. [@Worldbank]
7/ Now, sanctions are a tool, not an ends. And a few weeks after the U.S. withdrawal, the Trump administration laid out its objectives: Finally, a chance for critics of the JCPOA to deliver the "better deal" they insisted was possible.
Here are those (unmet) demands.
8/ What ensued was predictable: U.S. continued to ratchet up pressure, Iran responded on the nuclear & regional fronts, leading to more pressure, leading to more provocation, leading... well you get the picture. And what off-ramps came were missed. bit.ly/3N1y8rl
9/ Now, let's set aside the fact that not one of these goals were achieved - indeed, in many cases problems were made worse - and focus on the nuclear issue.
For within Trump's big gamble on fixing everything was that one big thing wouldn't change.
It was a very bad call.
10/ The JCPOA is an arms control agreement. It is not based on naivety about other aspects of Iranian policy where concern is shared by European and regional allies, but on prioritization of those concerns where the shadow of a nuclear crisis clouds everything else.
11/ Some, like Trump's NSA, insist that flaw in the policy was that maximum pressure didn't go far enough; that regime change was and is the only real solution.
If you find yourself digging in a hole you've made, stop complaining about the shovel.
12/ In past year, #ViennaTalks have been aimed at triaging the situation by reviving the nuclear deal as a nuclear deal. The logic of this approach, all the more important after Trump's experiment, is that fixing one very big thing - the non-proliferation concern - is critical.
13/ And all the more critical given that over past 3 years, expansion of uranium stockpiles, increase in enrichment rates, deployment of new centrifuges, R&D has put Iran's nuclear program on the cusp of breakout capability [WSJ chart].
14/ If you want to know why this is concerning, let former Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu explain:
15/ Now, the good news is that a year of diplomatic effort have crafted a framework for fixing Trump's folly. It increases inspections, cuts the stockpiles, reduces enrichment rates, and lengthens breakout time. European allies are certainly ready to roll:
16/16 The magic bullet approach of fixing everything has proven magical thinking. Question now is whether Washington & Tehran can overcome remaining obstacles to undo the damage, and do what should have been obvious: a good deal you build on is better than no deal at all.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
After the June war, the Islamic Republic took away several lessons.
Unfortunately, they're almost uniformly the wrong ones. 1/
2/ By any objective measure, the 12 day war was a lopsided affair: Iran's defensive capabilities were AWOL, its missiles and drones mostly repelled, and its intelligence failures were massive.
Yet the IRI's narrative is that the conflict was a victory.
3/ This narrative is based on a couple of elements - the ability to maintain command and control despite opening strikes against senior military leadership, U.S./Israeli request for ceasefire, and the fact that the system was, at the end, still standing.
For nearly two weeks, protests sparked by Iran's economic turmoil have spread into the latest wave of nationwide anti-regime unrest.
A system already struggling to contend with unprecedented setbacks in its foreign & regional policy now faces major new challenges from below.🧵
2/ 2024 was annus horribilis for the Islamic Republic and its "Axis of Resistance": Hamas & Hizbollah were severely degraded by Israel's post-7 Oct campaigns, Bashar Al-Assad was toppled in Damascus, the two exchanges with Israel showed limits of offensive/defensive capacity.
3/ 2025 was even worse.
Negotiations with the US were fruitless, sanctions increased, and in June Israel launched a major attack that set back its nuclear/missile programs, and revealed substantial intel vulnerabilities.
Ten years and ten weeks after the adoption of UNSCR 2231, the implementation of snapback completes the paperwork for burying the JCPOA.
It's a milestone confirming, legally and bureaucratically, what has for 3 years been a diplomatic and technical reality. 🧵
2/ @CrisisGroup has been following this file for 20+ years. The 6 resolutions that return at midnight GMT are the revived legacy of the first decade of the nuclear crisis - an era of deepening standoff between Iran and the (somewhat but not always aligned) P5+1 powers.
3/ That was followed by what could be broadly termed the JCPOA decade - U.S./Iran backchannels, an interim deal in 2013, followed by the agreement itself - which is what UNSCR 2231 unanimously endorsed in 2015.
Iran's nuclear program is at the most advanced point its ever been. Breakout time is under a week. Transparency is limited.
Yet we're still debating dismantlement vs rollback/restrictions as though it's not an issue with a pretty conclusive track record.🧵
2/ Successive U.S. administrations have all agreed on one thing: The Islamic Republic having a nuclear weapon is bad for U.S. national security interests.
That premise leads to two possible approaches: Dismantle it, or work to minimize the proliferation risk.
3/ The former has an unblemished record of failure over a period of decades. The possibility of that record changing now is nil.
This week, the Trump administration issued NSPM-2, laying out the economic and diplomatic tools of a renewed "Maximum Pressure" campaign, while POTUS @realDonaldTrump called for a "Verified Nuclear Peace Agreement" with Iran.
🧵 on reading the early tea leaves.
2/ In 2018-20, "Max Pressure" post-U.S. withdrawal from JCPOA put a massive dent in Iran's economy. Iran retaliated with a two-pronged counter-pressure campaign: nuclear escalation and regional provocation. There was little substantive engagement/diplomacy between the two sides.
3/ Under the Biden admin, talks in 2021-22 to revive the JCPOA came to naught. De-escalatory understandings in 2023 collapsed after Hamas's 7 October attack against Israel. U.S. focus turned to avoiding widening of conflict, and defending allies and interests.
When President @realDonaldTrump takes office in January 2025, the #Iran his administration will face will be, relative to four years earlier, weaker on several fronts, and changed on several others. 🧵
2/ Domestically, absence of major protests for ~2 years cannot obscure deep gap between state and society.
Social, cultural, political and economic discontent persist, while government's default remains repression over any meaningful reform to address them.
3/ Regionally, setbacks to Hamas & Hezbollah have weakened parts of IRI "Axis of Resistance", though others continue to pose a threat to Israel/U.S. interests. Meanwhile, prospect of retaliation for Israel's 26 Oct attacks - and counter-strikes in response - remain significant.