It would be quite a feat to make Hakeem Jeffries appear wise or to render Chuck Schumer principled. But such will be the effect of the putative Iran peace deal if it is consummated.
It is not too late to back out, and it is certainly possible to do so over the next sixty days of negotiations. But if the Trump Administration goes through with any deal over this period, it is very likely that America will have given up all leverage and the possibility of lasting world peace, while getting little in return. Terrorism in the Middle East, in short, will still be with us.
First, what does the United States actually gain from the Iran peace deal that it could not have obtained otherwise? And does Iran, in turn, achieve its central objective of keeping the IRGC intact and powerful? If so, the IRGC leopard will not be changing its spots any time soon.
The Strait of Hormuz would apparently be reopened immediately, but this is a dubious benefit, since renewed bombing could have forced it open in any case, and indeed seems already to have opened in one of the two main shipping lanes as we speak.
Still to be achieved is negotiating the main putative benefits – the abandonment of Iran’s nuclear program, accompanied by a handover of all enriched uranium, presumably with some inspection regime. But we have already hamstrung the nuclear program, and it remains to be seen what safeguards and inspections we will document. Continued ability to bomb does not require an agreement and may be the best enforcement mechanism.
Finally, the U.S. will receive some promise that Iran will not support terrorism in the future. The latter promise, quite significant if honored, will be impossible to enforce, precisely why Iran has supposedly agreed to it. How can we be certain that there has been no transfer of funds to Hamas, Hezbollah, or the Houthis? Verification will be impossible.
And aren’t we giving a strong signal when the negotiators persuaded the U.S. to, in turn, force Israel to cease attacks on Hezbollah in Lebanon? Will the IRGC abandon these proxies? We are fools to believe this. Part of coming negotiations will seek to restrain Israel, our strength in the region. Why? Because terrorism is intended. Who with common sense thinks otherwise?
So, what is the U.S. getting in this Iran deal? A drop in gasoline prices, perhaps a month or two earlier than we could have forced open the Strait without any deal. What does Iran receive? It appears that, at the outset, Iran would receive at least partial sanctions relief worth billions of dollars. J.D. Vance is specific that no American dollars will be given at this time.
But it is thereby certain that some billions will be unfrozen Iranian assets, and thus not technically American dollars. Is there any doubt to a rational person that the IRGC will get most of this money, pay its soldiers, and buy weapons? And then, after sixty days, claim that, hey, it never agreed to anything, and we are closing the Strait while proceeding to destroy Israel? That eventuality will occur, to a high degree of metaphysical certainty.
Certainly, Iran would gain an end to our strangling of its financial lifeline through our very effective blockade. And yet, we won’t have any assurance this week or next month on the nuclear prong of the inchoate deal. Nor of the promise to cease supporting terrorism. The destruction of Western Christianity and Judaism has been the goal of Islamic jihadists for 1400 years. But it will stop in sixty days? If this happens, drinks are on this author.
The IRGC will now live to fight another day, as we let them off the mat. Iranian citizens will still be oppressed, especially women and gays, with dissenters still subject to execution.
Trump will act as though he is a consequential dealmaker, but critics will see this agreement as a hollow, narcissistic piece of paper designed to coincide with the President’s birthday and his UFC celebratory White House event.
Democrats will argue that America received little for a “war of choice,” an absurd but rationally attractive label. The claim will also be that a naive President was led into a war by Israel based on overly optimistic assumptions. He will also not be seen as a skilled negotiator, giving away his leverage for little in return.
Even if a final deal after sixty days of wrangling will seem fine, why couldn’t we simply bomb Iran until they sign now what we will be begging them to sign over the next sixty days? Of course, the IRGC will remain in control, notwithstanding any contrary claims, and love the money they will get from American naifs over the next sixty days. Trump will be seen as having been played for a sucker.
So, Trump is certain to be in a box of his intemperate urges for a deal to sell, when in sixty days he will have the Hobson’s choice of resuming bombing, the right thing to do, or losing the House and the Senate.
The operation against Iran was brilliant, bold, and politically courageous, and for a moment the world stood on the brink of a lasting Mideast peace that would have left China isolated and easier to restrain. Instead, with Trump’s stroke of a pen on this deal, Hakeem Jeffries and Charles Schumer can each dust off his halo and prepare to wear it proudly, while taking over the House and the Senate, not coincidentally destroying a promising comeback for America.
_______________
John D. O’Connor is a former federal prosecutor and the San Francisco attorney who represented W. Mark Felt during his revelation as Deep Throat in 2005. O’Connor is the author of the books Postgate: How the Washington Post Betrayed Deep Throat, Covered Up Watergate and Began Today’s Partisan Advocacy Journalism and The Mysteries of Watergate: What Really Happened. O’Connor and Mark Felt also collaborated on the 2006 book, A G-Man’s Life.
