On Iran, Trump Should Ignore Netanyahu

On Iran, Trump Should Ignore Netanyahu

On Iran, Trump Should Ignore Netanyahu

A nuclear deal with Tehran would serve U.S. inter­ests.

Magnifying,Iran,On,Map

Cred­it: KPG-Ivary

Pres­i­dent Trump has made a habit of drop­ping major news when Israel’s Prime Min­is­ter Ben­jamin Netanyahu vis­its the White House. In ear­ly Feb­ru­ary, dur­ing a joint news con­fer­ence with the Israeli leader, Trump debuted his plan for the U.S. to take over Gaza and turn it into the “Riv­iera of the Mid­dle East.” Last week, with Netanyahu mak­ing an emer­gency trip to Wash­ing­ton to dis­cuss tar­iffs, Trump broke the news that direct nego­ti­a­tions with Iran over the country’s nuclear pro­gram would begin in Oman over the week­end.

“Every­one agrees that doing a deal is prefer­able to doing the obvi­ous,” Trump told reporters in the Oval Office, the “obvi­ous” refer­ring to mil­i­tary strikes on Iran­ian nuclear facil­i­ties. There was one per­son in the room, sit­ting just a few feet away, who has made clear over and over again that he would pre­fer that obvi­ous option: Ben­jamin Netanyahu.

Trump is mak­ing the right call by kick­start­ing diplo­ma­cy to deal with Iran’s nuclear pro­gram. Pre­vent­ing Iran from acquir­ing a nuclear weapon through diplo­ma­cy advances U.S. inter­ests in the Mid­dle East. A new accord would not only put Iran’s nuclear pro­gram in a box, but give Wash­ing­ton a bet­ter shot at retrench­ing from a region of declin­ing strate­gic impor­tance. The pres­i­dent would be smart to ignore Netanyahu’s advice about the talks and the con­tours of a poten­tial deal. 

Netanyahu, the longest-serv­ing pre­mier in Israeli his­to­ry, has an exten­sive his­to­ry of pro­vid­ing coun­sel to U.S. pol­i­cy­mak­ers that turns out to be at odds with U.S. inter­ests. Before the 2003 inva­sion of Iraq, Netanyahu said there was “no ques­tion” that Sad­dam Hus­sein was devel­op­ing nuclear weapons. He famous­ly said that tak­ing out Saddam’s regime would “have enor­mous pos­i­tive rever­ber­a­tions on the region” and lead to a demo­c­ra­t­ic upris­ing in Iran. As almost every­one now agrees, that advice has proven to be spec­tac­u­lar­ly wrong.

Since 1995, Netanyahu has been warn­ing that an Iran­ian nuclear weapon was just around the cor­ner. Thir­ty years lat­er, Tehran has yet to devel­op an atom­ic bomb, though Netanyahu has pushed for poli­cies that make Iran more like­ly to achieve a nuclear weapons capa­bil­i­ty. Netanyahu opposed Pres­i­dent Obama’s sign­ing of the 2015 Joint Com­pre­hen­sive Plan of Action (aka, the Iran nuclear deal), which curbed the country’s pro­gram. And he encour­aged Wash­ing­ton to pull out of the deal despite Iran’s com­pli­ance with it, which Trump did in 2018. One rea­son Trump is hav­ing dif­fi­cul­ty get­ting a new, bet­ter deal is that Tehran under­stand­ably fears anoth­er U.S. abne­ga­tion.

Netanyahu is tout­ing the so-called “Libya mod­el” as the basis for a U.S. posi­tion on a deal with Iran. This seems like a bad faith rec­om­men­da­tion, a poi­son pill designed to kill nego­ti­a­tions. Netanyahu knows Iran would nev­er agree to take the steps that Libyan dic­ta­tor Muam­mar Gaddafi announced in late 2003. Bow­ing to West­ern pres­sure, Tripoli dis­man­tled its nuclear pro­gram in exchange for the promise of sanc­tions relief. Less than a decade lat­er, NATO pro­vid­ed air cov­er as a rebel mili­tia over­threw the Libyan gov­ern­ment and, ulti­mate­ly, cap­tured and killed Gaddafi in grue­some fash­ion. Iran would be fool­ish to take the same path. Even if the “Libya mod­el” didn’t lead to a col­lapse of the Islam­ic Repub­lic, it would involve Tehran’s giv­ing away all its nego­ti­at­ing lever­age.

The Trump admin­is­tra­tion should rec­og­nize that demand­ing the full dis­man­tle­ment of Iran’s civil­ian nuclear pro­gram serves Netanyahu’s inter­ests, not America’s. The Unit­ed States has already done more than enough to sup­port Israel’s war on Gaza since Hamas’s Octo­ber 7 atroc­i­ties, pro­vid­ing rough­ly $30 bil­lion in mil­i­tary sup­port. The costs of U.S. sup­port go beyond the finan­cial expen­di­ture. The State Depart­ment has warned that U.S. sup­port for Israel has gal­va­nized ter­ror­ist orga­ni­za­tions’ recruit­ment efforts and ignit­ed anti-Amer­i­can sen­ti­ment. As the U.S. wages war against Yemen’s Houthis, who are attack­ing ships in the Red Sea to protest Israel’s assault on Gaza, Wash­ing­ton is in the midst of a dra­mat­ic mil­i­tary buildup in the region, mov­ing mis­sile defense sys­tems and long-range stealth bombers from Asia to the Mid­dle East. While such moves may be aimed at deter­ring Iran and forc­ing it to the nego­ti­at­ing table, they also height­en the risks of region­al con­flict.

A new nuclear deal would allow the Unit­ed States to reduce its mil­i­tary foot­print in the Mid­dle East. The orig­i­nal accord may not have been per­fect, but it placed lim­its on Iran’s nuclear pro­gram and put inspec­tors on the ground. With Iran con­sid­er­ably weak­ened over the last year and a half, its incen­tives to devel­op nuclear weapons are con­sid­er­ably higher—and so is its will­ing­ness to nego­ti­ate.

Pres­i­dent Trump thus has an oppor­tu­ni­ty to pull the Mid­dle East back from the brink of region­al con­fla­gra­tion. Even before the ongo­ing mil­i­tary buildup began a few weeks ago, there were some 40,000 U.S troops in the region. A war with Iran would put them at grave risk. A deal with Iran would sig­nif­i­cant­ly mit­i­gate that risk—and pro­vide an oppor­tu­ni­ty to bring them home.

A new Iran deal would also stymie pro­lif­er­a­tion risks. If Tehran were to acquire nuclear weapons, Sau­di Ara­bia and oth­er region­al rivals might seek to build nuclear weapons of their own, ignit­ing a dan­ger­ous arms race with dire impli­ca­tions for glob­al secu­ri­ty.

The Trump admin­is­tra­tion has made clear that the alter­na­tive to an Iran nuclear deal is war. Such a con­flict would fur­ther desta­bi­lize a Mid­dle East already in chaos. More­over, since the Amer­i­can peo­ple reelect­ed Trump in part because they viewed him as the anti-war can­di­date, a new For­ev­er War against Iran could tank his approval rat­ings. If the admin­is­tra­tion tru­ly intends to pri­or­i­tize peace and the inter­ests of the Amer­i­can peo­ple, it should resist Netanyahu’s attempts to under­mine diplo­ma­cy with Iran.

The post On Iran, Trump Should Ignore Netanyahu appeared first on The Amer­i­can Con­ser­v­a­tive.