Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Alan Dowty's avatar

The only way that the U.S. got such universal support to force the Iranians to back down on nuclear weapons was by focusing on that alone. There was no such support (Russia, China, etc.) on other issues. Throwing them into the mix would have led to failure on the main goal.

Expand full comment
Robert Lerman's avatar

Hi, Alan,

Glad to see you are active. Although I agree with several of your posts, this one ignores an important tradeoff that critics have highlighted. The JCPOA eliminated most sactions that would end of strengthening Iran economically and thus providing more revenues to pursue the aggressive and often terrorist tactics in the region and elsewher. Certainly, Hezbollah has fewer resources because of the reimposition of sanctions, with several articles citing their difficult in paying salaries of their armed men. With more revenues and fewer sanctions, Iran would be able to do more to build up non-nuclear military weaponry. And the JCPOA ended up removing the UN sanction on missile development (yes, I know they would be ignoring this saction but at least their violation would be clear). Despite all these negatives, I can understand some arguing for the JCPOA, but what I cannot understand is how you can ignore the tradeoffs embedded in the policy.

Expand full comment
4 more comments...

No posts