President Donald Trump’s desire to outdo and undo the achievements of former President Barack Obama is well-documented. Trump in 2018 tore up the 2015 agreement by his predecessor to limit Iran’s ability to develop its own nuclear weapons. And now, Trump faces a challenge of getting a better deal as he tries to wind down a costly war.
The president is “adamant” that he can exceed Obama in Iran, said The Hill. But foreign policy experts warn that getting a satisfactory deal will be “easier said than done,” said The Hill.
The “dizzyingly complicated” Obama agreement took two years to negotiate and involved experts “poring over the details of nuclear technology, sanctions and international banking,” said the outlet. The U.S. decision to abandon that agreement and go to war may have convinced Tehran that a nuclear weapon would be the “best deterrent they can pursue,” said Allison McManus, of the Center for American Progress, to the outlet.
The earlier agreement “capped Iran’s uranium enrichment for 15 years,” said CNN. Trump is now demanding a 20-year pause, while Iran wants limits for just five years. But Tehran is negotiating with new leverage. Its closure of the Strait of Hormuz is a “weapon that’s far more usable than nuclear weapons,” said Fareed Zakaria at CNN.
What did the commentators say? Trump has sold himself as the “ultimate dealmaker,” but that image is in conflict with his “love of unilateral power,” said Bill Scher at Washington Monthly. A good negotiator has “patience, creativity and flexibility,” but the president prefers “impatiently breaking laws and norms.” Trump launched the war with Iran amid weeks of negotiations, which have left the regime’s leaders leery of reengaging.
One big difference between the 2015 agreement and any deal the U.S. makes now is that Iran’s nuclear program is “largely in rubble,” said Eli Lake at The Free Press. The country’s ability to quickly develop a weapon has been “taken away.”
What next? If a deal is reached, Trump will be asked to demonstrate that his war provided a superior outcome than what prewar negotiations in Geneva were set to deliver. Otherwise, the president will have “inflicted massive damage on the world economy” unnecessarily, said The Guardian.
|