USA TODAY International Edition
Why we are headed for US-Iran blowup
It started when Trump quit nuke deal
Tensions in the volatile U.S.-Iran relationship are increasing, and the two sides are ever closer to the possibility of a direct military confrontation since President Donald Trump condemned what was almost certainly an Iranian mine attack disabling two oil tankers in the Gulf of Oman last week. A serious conflict isn’t inevitable, but the odds are rising. How did we get here and, more troubling, exactly where are we going? Amid all the hype, spin and storytelling from both sides, here are some harsh truths about the Trump administration and its Iranian adversaries.
The Iranian regime is authoritarian, ideological and repressive, a serial human rights abuser and regional troublemaker. But we now find ourselves in a dangerous situation largely as a result of a great unraveling begun by the Trump administration’s unilateral decision last year to withdraw from the 2015 Iran nuclear agreement.
The accord — known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) — didn’t address Iran’s aggressive regional behavior or its ballistic missile programs. Even so, it was a highly functional arms control agreement that imposed significant constraints on Iran’s nuclear program for a decade or more.
Candidate Trump vowed to renegotiate or leave what he deemed the worst agreement ever negotiated. Then as president, he pulled out and launched his “maximum pressure” campaign. The administration reimposed sanctions on banking and petrochemicals and has made a major effort to reduce Iran’s lifeblood — its oil exports — to zero. As intended, all of this has wreaked havoc on the Iranian economy.
‘Maximum pressure,’ no Plan B
The regime signaled through mine attacks on six oil tankers in the past month that it had options, too. Oil prices spiked within hours of Thursday’s attacks. No matter how egregious Iran’s behavior in other areas, leaving the JCPOA without a Plan B other than “maximum pressure” has more than any other factor brought us where we are: mistrust at an all-time high, the dynamic is drift and deterioration.
Given the bellicose rhetoric on both sides, it’s stunning that there hasn’t been a clash already in Syria, Iraq or the Persian Gulf. But the impulsive words have not been reflected in deeds, revealing caution from both Trump and Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei.
Trump has repeatedly said he wants to meet with Iran’s leaders and, given his campaign promises, wants to avoid another costly war in the Middle East (despite his hard-line national security adviser John Bolton, who would like the regime bombed if not overthrown). Khamenei is putting regime survival ahead of all else, given his advanced age, health concerns and an unresolved succession. He is wary of the uncertainty that would accompany a major war with America. He must also contend with an Iranian Revolutionary Guards Corps itching for a fight.
Endgame unclear, if it exists
And so Khamenei and Trump test each other — Trump piling on sanctions and deploying naval and air assets to the region; Khamenei signaling through Revolutionary Guards attacks against oil tankers (sparing U.S. targets so far) that Iran has a vote, too. There has been no act serious enough to trigger a direct attack by either side. A major escalation can’t be counted out, however, largely because there is little to stabilize the situation.
The Trump administration’s endgame strategy is unclear, if it even has a strategy. It publicly asserts that its goal is to get Iran back to the negotiating table to fashion some new agreement, but is Trump prepared to make the serious concessions Iran would demand? Is Tehran even interested?
Both sides badly need a hotline or channel to deconflict their military forces in order to preempt a serious escalation. During the Obama administration, Iranian negotiators reportedly rejected such an idea. Now they want to keep the pressure on; they may see it as a sign of weakness and reject it again.
The cruel reality is that it may well require more tension, perhaps even a U.S.-Iranian clash, to convince each side that the situation is too dangerous to continue. Yet once direct conflict begins, it might be impossible to stop. The headlines of the U.S.-Iranian crisis look bad, but the trend lines look even worse. Washington and Tehran seem headed sooner or later for a blowup, and one would be hard-pressed right now to figure out how to preempt it.
Aaron David Miller, a distinguished fellow at the Woodrow Wilson International Center and former State Department adviser and Middle East negotiator, is author of “The End of Greatness: Why America Can’t Have (and Doesn’t Want) Another Great President.”