The Illusions of an Accord

Twelve years of negotiations, an unprecedented modern investment of time by powerful foreign affairs ministers, 140 pages of text and 120 technical annexes. The adjective “historic” naturally comes to mind when thinking of the Vienna nuclear accord, and the joy of Tehran’s population is touching.

But now we must be realistic and ask substantive questions. Suppose that the agreement overcomes the political obstacles required for its implementation by the end of the year, meaning approval from the U.S. Congress, no objection from the Iranian authorities, and approval from the International Atomic Energy Agency. Will this agreement meet the goals that the international community has laid out? Can we say that the Iranian nuclear crisis is resolved? Will this agreement have positive effects in the Middle East? Unfortunately, the answer to all three questions is “no.”

Think back: What did the Europeans want in 2003, and what have the P5+1 wanted since 2006? They wanted Tehran to make a major strategic choice, clearly and verifiably renouncing all military nuclear ambitions in exchange for reintegration into the international community. However, the July 14 accord does not provide the hoped-for guarantees. Due to pressure from the Obama administration, we have gone from the goal of “roll-back” to that of “containment.” In 12 years, Iran has become a “threshold country,” capable of making a nuclear device in a short time if it wants to. And it is going to stay that way. Certainly, the agreement will have a small effect, since in the next 10 years, the time Iran needs to create the quantity of material needed for one or more bombs will be increased — it will be one year. But a decade is a short time for Iranian revolutionaries … and for a nuclear program it has maintained for 30 years. We should recall our hopes for North Korea in 1994, when American negotiators were persuaded that the regime would be transformed by 2004.

The Iranian crisis is far from settled. Based on Iran’s behavior over the past 20 years, you can bet that Tehran will do all it can to test the international community’s resolve, by interpreting the agreement minimally and putting sticks in the wheels of U.N. inspectors. We could well find ourselves in a situation similar to that of Iraq in the 1990s. We know how that turned out. And we can’t count on the threat of reimposing sanctions. Although creative procedures have been provided for this purpose, they will be very difficult to put in place if the Iranians play well, meaning that they refrain from any overtly provocative actions in the nuclear arena in favor of a policy of baby steps, or “mithridate”—something they know very well how to do.*

The hopes for “reconciliation” — a term used as if we are describing a simple domestic dispute! — between the U.S. and Iran are futile. The Vienna accord is a limited transaction, not the beginning of a profound transformation. The leader of the revolution in Iran has already clearly stated that he conceives of a change in Iran-U.S. relations only if Washington in fact recognizes Tehran’s dominance in the region. And opposition to the West is one of the regime’s principal drivers.

As for hopes for positive effects in the Middle East, that’s another illusion. Iran already fights against the Islamic State because it is in its own interest to do so. At the same time, a better financial and budgetary situation created from the suspension of sanctions will permit Tehran to keep or even increase its military investment in Syria, where it supports the bloody regime of Bashar al-Assad and Iraqi Shiite militias, whose behavior largely encourages the emergence of the Islamic State group. And Saudi Arabia, believing that its American protector has betrayed it, will continue to pose the question of a possible national nuclear option.

For Iran’s principal ally, July 14 is a special date. That is effectively the anniversary of the overthrow of the Iraqi monarchy, and it is due to this that Saddam Hussein’s regime in the 1980s used the code reference “July 14” to refer to its nuclear weapons program. Let’s hope that history won’t repeat itself.

*Editor’s note: The term “mithridate” refers to Mithridates VI, said to have become immune to poisons by taking them in gradually increased doses.