Eakinomics: Trump and the Iran Deal

Confusion reigns following President Trump’s decision regarding the Iran nuclear agreement. Consider the coverage of United Nations Ambassador Nikki Haley’s appearance on Meet the Press. It featured her observation that “We’re not saying they’re in breach of the agreement.” Correct, Trump’s action was a failure to certify to Congress under the Iran Nuclear Agreement Review Act — a U.S. law. It was not a failed certification requirement under the deal itself.

Similarly, the president’s failure to certify kicks off a 60-day window for Congress to re-impose sanctions. If it does, that action would put the United States out of compliance with the agreement. Thus, Haley’s statement that “I think right now, you’re going to see us stay in the deal, because what our hope is that we can improve the situation, and that’s the goal,” is technically correct.

Stepping back from the process and sanctions decision, this is an opportunity for Congress and the Trump Administration to come to grips with Iran’s role in the region. The Iran deal was never a good deal because it treated Iran as merely an issue of nuclear proliferation, and not as a fundamental force in destabilizing the region. A richer strategy would encompass the reality that Iran is a state sponsor of terrorism, supports the Assad regime in Syria that has killed hundreds of thousands and displaced of millions, violated human rights within its borders, and cost the lives of hundreds of Americans.

As Senate Armed Forces Chairman John McCain put it, “I look forward to working with my colleagues in Congress on additional legislation to increase sanctions and other pressure to hold Iran accountable for its broader destructive behavior in the region. I am also eager to collaborate with our partners and allies to revisit the most problematic provisions of the nuclear deal, and support a unified, forceful international front in the event that Iran materially breaches the terms of the agreement.”