Los Angeles Times

A bigger Iran hawk than Trump

Mike Pompeo’s staunch views bode ill for 2015 nuclear deal

- By Tracy Wilkinson and Brian Bennett

WASHINGTON — President Trump’s nomination of Mike Pompeo as secretary of State probably augurs the end of the 2015 accord that has blocked Iran from building nuclear weapons, an agreement praised by world powers but detested by Trump — and by Pompeo, a notable hawk on the Islamic Republic.

Trump has set a May 12 deadline to withdraw from the Iran nuclear accord unless European allies “fix” it, a prospect that appears unlikely. The president also has agreed to meet in May with Kim Jong Un to try to persuade the North Korean leader to surrender his already large nuclear arsenal, which seems even more remote.

Juggling two powerful adversarie­s in torturous nuclear diplomacy would stress any White House, but Trump will grapple with Iran and North Korea with a newly reshuffled foreign policy and national security team and a thin bench of experts in a hollowed-out State Department.

In Pompeo, the president

will get a bellicose secretary of State who, while serving in Congress in 2014, called for breaking off talks with Tehran and launching hundreds of airstrikes instead against its nuclear facilities — not unlike Trump’s vow last year to unleash “fire and fury” against North Korea.

Several diplomats say Trump will have a hard time coaxing North Korea to conclude a nuclear deal if he has just abandoned one with Iran that was unanimousl­y approved by the United Nations Security Council and is closely monitored by U.N. nuclear inspectors — who have found no Iranian violations.

Like the president, Pompeo long has complained that the Obama administra­tion signed a deeply flawed agreement, one Trump calls “the worst deal ever.”

In the critics’ view, the U.S. should not have agreed to any time limits, known as sunset clauses, in the deal. Most important, some nuclear restrictio­ns will expire in 2030, and the opponents say Iran can then again push for a bomb.

Critics also say the exhaustive negotiatio­ns — which sought to prevent Iran from designing, building or acquiring nuclear weapons — should have included other Iranian threats, including its ballistic missile program and its support for militant groups in the Middle East.

But Trump will face sharp opposition from U.S. allies and other members of the U.N. Security Council if he unilateral­ly quits the accord. It could put the U.S. in violation of a U.N. resolution and create global friction if Washington imposes new sanctions on Iran.

In a bid to make Trump’s case, the State Department director for policy planning, Brian Hook, will lead a U.S. delegation to the Internatio­nal Atomic Energy Agency in Vienna for meetings Friday with the five other world powers that signed the deal, plus Iran. The IAEA is the U.N.’s nuclear watchdog agency.

Hook may meet separately with Iran’s deputy foreign minister, Abbas Araghchi, who is leading the Iranian side. On Wednesday, Araghchi told a parliament­ary committee in Tehran that Iran would quit the deal if Trump does, raising fears that Iran would then try to restart its nuclear program.

With the May deadline fast approachin­g, advocates for keeping the deal have dialed up their warnings.

“If we walk away, we walk away alone,” said William Burns, former deputy secretary of State who led 2013-14 back-channel meetings with Iran that helped pave the way for talks in Vienna that ultimately sealed the deal in July 2015.

“Iran would feel unconstrai­ned over time” to rebuild its nuclear infrastruc­ture, said Burns, who now heads the nonpartisa­n Carnegie Endowment for Internatio­nal Peace. “That door would be open to them, and it would be hard to re-create the diplomatic effort” that brought world powers together to forge the deal.

The Iran deal “has been a great success in terms of global security, and we should defend it,” agreed Simon Gass, Britain’s lead negotiator in the nuclear talks and a former ambassador to Iran.

“If the U.S. walks away, those who would be the happiest are sitting in the Kremlin,” Gass said, because it would drive a wedge between Washing ton and its allies in Europe.

Trump fired Secretary of State Rex Tillerson on Tuesday, announcing his ouster on Twitter, and said he would nominate Pompeo, the CIA director, to replace him. Trump and Tillerson had clashed for months over Trump’s pledge to scrap the Iran deal and add sanctions on Tehran.

During heated Oval Office debates last summer, Pompeo advocated killing the deal, arguing that it had given an economic boost to Tehran that had allowed it to intervene more forcefully with armed proxies in Yemen, Syria and elsewhere.

“When you look at the Iran deal, I think it’s terrible,” Trump told reporters Tuesday. Tillerson, he said, “felt it was OK.”

Pompeo, in contrast, has expressed views more hawkish than Trump’s. As a Republican tea party member of Congress from Kansas from 2011 to 2017, he called for the ouster of the theocracy that has ruled Iran for nearly four decades.

In 2014, as the Iran negotiatio­ns moved into their final months, Pompeo joined critics who demanded that the Obama administra­tion break off the talks. A former Army officer, Pompeo also called for airstrikes, saying fewer than 2,000 bombing sorties could take out Iran’s nuclear capabiliti­es.

“This is not an insurmount­able task for the coalition forces,” he said at the time.

The following summer, when the accord was finalized, Pompeo bluntly mischaract­erized its provisions. “This deal allows Iran to continue its nuclear program — that’s not foreign policy, it’s surrender,” he said.

Last summer, as CIA director, Pompeo told the Aspen Security Forum that the nuclear deal “could stop a few centrifuge­s from spinning,” referring to the devices used to enrich uranium for nuclear fuel. But, he added, the “challenge of the agreement is that it is short term. It … covers only a narrow piece of the Iranian risk profile.”

He dismissed Iran’s compliance with the deal as “grudging, minimalist, temporary.”

Under the accord, Iran was required to destroy or dismantle its nuclear infrastruc­ture, ship out enriched uranium and allow strict monitoring and inspection­s by IAEA inspectors to make sure it does not cheat.

The IAEA has issued nine reports so far and none have found violations. U.S. intelligen­ce agencies have agreed that Tehran is meeting its obligation­s, and that its ability to “race for a bomb” has been pushed far back.

In exchange, a web of U.N. economic sanctions were steadily lifted from Iran and the country was allowed to reenter the global market and banking systems.

As a candidate, Trump vowed to rip up the deal, and he has bitterly complained that a U.S. law requires him to periodical­ly waive nuclear-related sanctions to confirm to Congress that Iran is in compliance.

When he last did so, on Jan. 12, Trump vowed to not do it again — and gave European allies four months to find a way to meet his concerns or he would pull out of the deal.

The process would be relatively simple because the nuclear accord is not a formal treaty. The U.S. signed it as part of an executive order by President Obama, so Trump would need to take no formal steps beyond reimposing sanctions and announcing his decision.

It’s possible other signatorie­s to the deal could keep it alive without U.S. participat­ion. It would require a “soft exit” to limit the effect of new sanctions so European companies and others could continue trading with and investing in Iran without fear of being shut out of U.S. markets. It also would require Iranian buy-in.

In theory, that could leave the door open for a future U.S. administra­tion to rejoin the agreement.

Several British, French and German diplomats who visited Washington in recent weeks to meet with Trump administra­tion officials expressed frustratio­n with the president’s ultimatum partly because it’s not entirely clear what, if anything, would keep him in the deal.

They have proposed supplement­al agreements to address key concerns — especially the sunset clauses — and say follow-on measures could be enacted without scuttling the existing deal.

But several diplomats left Washington convinced that the proposals would not satisfy Trump, who, they said, seems to have already made up his mind.

“The Europeans are starting to question [U.S.] predictabi­lity,” said Angela Kane, a German diplomat who served as U.N. high representa­tive for disarmamen­t affairs during the Iran negotiatio­ns. “This is becoming a very difficult thing for Europeans to stomach.”

Allies seeking to preserve the Iran deal say a U.S. withdrawal would benefit Iranian hard-liners who opposed negotiatin­g with the West in the first place and wanted to preserve the nuclear program. Reinstatin­g U.S. sanctions would give Tehran an excuse to blame the country’s economic problems on America, analysts said.

But Trump is unlikely to get pushback from Pompeo, a kindred spirit when it comes to Iran.

Pompeo “has a long track record on Iran and has been quite hostile towards the Islamic Republic,” said Reuel Marc Gerecht, a former CIA expert on Iran now at the Foundation for Defense of Democracie­s, a conservati­ve think tank that opposed the nuclear deal.

Pompeo’s “passion has only been heightened, not diminished, by his access” at the CIA, Gerecht added. “I expect he will aggressive­ly fulfill the president’s desire to have the deal renegotiat­ed — or scrapped.”

 ?? Saul Loeb AFP/Getty Images ?? MIKE POMPEO, the nominee for secretary of State, sought to derail the Iran nuclear talks while he was in Congress. Last year, he advocated killing the accord.
Saul Loeb AFP/Getty Images MIKE POMPEO, the nominee for secretary of State, sought to derail the Iran nuclear talks while he was in Congress. Last year, he advocated killing the accord.
 ?? Chip Somodevill­a Getty Images ?? WHILE HE was a congressma­n, CIA chief Mike Pompeo, right, called for the ouster of the theocracy that has ruled Iran since 1979.
Chip Somodevill­a Getty Images WHILE HE was a congressma­n, CIA chief Mike Pompeo, right, called for the ouster of the theocracy that has ruled Iran since 1979.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States