Click to View in Browser
David Harris Oped featured in
The Times of Israel [link removed]
[link removed]
Dear John,
Resuming contacts with Iran has become an early foreign policy
priority for the Biden administration. American Jewish Committee (AJC)
CEO David Harris, a long-time observer of the Iran issue, offers six
recommendations to the Biden Administration for any future
negotiations with the Iranian regime, in his latest piece in The Times
of Israel.
[link removed]
Best wishes,
Kenneth Bandler
AJC Director of Media Relations
Iran Nuclear Talks: 2021 Is Not 2015
The Times of Israel
[link removed]
By David Harris
February 23, 2021
The Biden administration has signaled its intention to re-enter
nuclear talks with Iran, following the Trump administration's
decision to withdraw from the 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action
(JCPOA).
The JCPOA was widely viewed by the Obama team as its signature foreign
policy achievement. Just about everyone connected with the last
go-around is slated to occupy a top post in Washington today.
Feelings about the 2015 deal remain red-hot in some quarters, with
supporters arguing it was the best deal possible and cut off all
pathways to an Iranian bomb, and opponents asserting it was weakly
negotiated and too narrowly focused.
Having followed Iran for decades, American Jewish Committee (AJC) took
a lively interest in the 2015 decision and debate. When the accord was
announced in Vienna on July 14, 2015, unlike many who reflexively
embraced or rejected the deal based on their partisan leanings, we
took more than three weeks to confer privately with a wide range of
leaders, including Secretary of State Kerry and Under Secretary of
State Sherman, both of whom graciously flew to New York for separate
meetings with AJC leadership.
In the end, AJC opposed the JCPOA, believing omissions regarding
Iran's regional behavior and ballistic missile program, as well
as inadequate inspections provisions and sunset clauses, made it too
risky a proposition. That said, we also voiced the hope that we would
be proved wrong in the ensuing years. It has become apparent that
these shortcomings in the original deal need to be addressed in any
new round of talks.
But my purpose here is not to re-litigate what happened six years ago.
What's past is past. Rather, it is to ask what can be learned.
For me, there are six principal lessons.
First, in 2015, the U.S. largely sidelined some of the countries most
directly affected by any deal, including our Sunni Arab allies in the
region and Israel, whose destruction Iran has repeatedly called for.
Those nations had grave doubts about the talks. As neighbors of Iran,
with considerable knowledge of what was taking place inside the
country, they could have added valuable insights. Instead, they were
largely viewed as dissonant voices who couldn't see beyond their
own narrow interests. This time around, they ought to be closely
consulted from start to finish, as some Western leaders have pledged.
Second, Iran played its hand shrewdly in 2015. In fact, its
finely-tuned negotiating methods should be taught in leading American
business and law schools. It had a weak hand, thanks to low oil prices
and punishing sanctions, but, sensing American eagerness for a deal
and playing off divisions among the partners at the table - U.S.,
China, France, Germany, Russia, U.K., and EU Commission - it came out
ahead. The U.S. and its allies have by far the stronger cards to play
with Iran. We should never forget it.
Third, speaking of cards, the Obama administration kept repeating that
"all options" were on the table, meaning that, if Iran
rejected the talks and pursued nuclear weapons, America reserved the
right to strike at those facilities. In theory, that was, of course,
the correct approach. Absent displays of strength, negotiating in such
circumstances becomes an awful lot tougher, if not quite fruitless.
The problem was, rightly or wrongly, no one in Tehran actually seemed
to believe the American threat, all the more so, perhaps, after the
president blinked on his Syrian "red line" in 2013. This
time, the threat needs to be more credible.
Fourth, the Obama administration was not able to persuade a single
Republican in either the Senate or House to support the JCPOA. In a
way, that set the stage for the Trump administration's
withdrawal three years later. Should this repeat itself, there could
be a similar reaction if a Republican wins the White House in 2024.
More effort needs to be invested in building bipartisan support for
any new deal, and that, of course, means taking into account, rather
than summarily dismissing, concerns voiced by responsible critics.
Fifth, a related point: In 2015, the Obama team framed the debate in a
binary fashion - there were supporters of the deal and then
there were its opponents, who were collectively described as
"warmongers." Not only was that a false choice, but it
gave critics who were not opposed to any deal, but were against the
way this particular deal was fashioned, no option but to stand in
strong, even angry, opposition.
And sixth, as I heard with my own ears, the Obama team made what
turned out to be at least two faulty assumptions. They believed
Iranian President Rouhani and Foreign Minister Zarif were
"moderates" or "reformers," and could be
played off against the "hardliners," led by Supreme Leader
Khamenei and the IRGC. That didn't work out as planned.
Moreover, they asserted that unfrozen funds sent back to Iran would
largely go to delayed civilian projects, such as schools, roads, and
hospitals, but instead they principally went to the regime's
instruments of power, control, and regional destabilization. Iran has
a revolutionary regime with hegemonic regional aims. Neither its
nature nor its goals should ever be underestimated.
2021 is not 2015. The world is different, the Middle East is
different, and America is different. It offers the Biden team a
precious chance to draw lessons from the past six years. The stakes in
dealing with Iran couldn't be higher, and getting it right is a
matter of the highest national interest.
David Harris is the CEO of American Jewish Committee (AJC). Please
join 82,200 others and follow him on Twitter @DavidHarrisAJC.
[link removed]
If you haven't already done so, please also join the growing community
of more than 715,000 followers on Twitter and more than 1,883,000
fans on Facebook to stay up-to-date on more AJC news and views.
[link removed]
[link removed]
AJC logo
[link removed]
Donate Button
[link removed]
[link removed]
[link removed]
[link removed]
[link removed]
AJC's mission is to enhance the well-being of the Jewish
people and Israel,
and to advance human rights and democratic values in the United
States and around the world.
© Copyright American Jewish Committee 2021
To unsubscribe or to manage your email preferences,
please click here.
[link removed]
