- The American Conservative - https://www.theamericanconservative.com -

Pompeo’s Hostility to the Nuclear Deal and Trump’s Disdain for Diplomacy

Looking back over previous statements from Mike Pompeo, I was struck by something he said [1] about the nuclear deal with Iran at a forum in Aspen last year:

This is Iranian compliance today. Grudging, minimalist, temporary with no intention of really what the agreement was designed to do [bold mine-DL], it was designed to foster stability and have Iran become a reentrant to the Western world, and the agreement simply hasn’t achieved that.

The nuclear deal with Iran was always designed to restrict Iran’s nuclear program and make it practically impossible for their government to develop and build nuclear weapons. That was why the deal was negotiated, and that is what it was designed to do. There may have been hopes in some quarters that it could become the foundation for a more constructive relationship between the U.S. and Iran, but the deal’s opponents did their very best to make sure that this could never happen. It is risible that a leading opponent of the deal would fault it for “failing” to do something that he and other Iran hawks have opposed just as bitterly. Iran hasn’t become a “reentrant to the Western world” because opponents of the nuclear deal keep looking for every excuse to impose new sanctions on other issues and renege on the agreement itself. The JCPOA couldn’t have done what Pompeo describes, but we know that Iran hawks including Pompeo would have fought tooth and nail against cultivating a post-deal rapprochement with Iran.

Opponents of the JCPOA don’t hate the deal because it fails to restrict Iran’s nuclear program. The deal has been a remarkably successful nonproliferation agreement and does exactly what it is supposed to do. Iran has remained in compliance since 2015 despite the overt efforts by the agreement’s opponents in the West to sabotage it. These opponents hate it because it deprived them of a pretext for war and because it was a compromise with an adversary that they wanted to see capitulate. They misrepresent what the deal was supposed to do so that they can declare it a failure, but they have no interest in a successful agreement that comes at the price of compromising with a government they want to attack. As usual, hawkish objections to the nuclear deal are made in bad faith. Pompeo’s hostility to one of America’s biggest diplomatic successes in decades should make clear that the man Trump is putting charge of the State Department shares the president’s deep disdain for diplomacy and the compromise it requires.

5 Comments (Open | Close)

5 Comments To "Pompeo’s Hostility to the Nuclear Deal and Trump’s Disdain for Diplomacy"

#1 Comment By Clyde Schechter On March 13, 2018 @ 6:02 pm

And Pompeo also share’s the President’s deep disdain for truth-telling.

#2 Comment By SteveM On March 13, 2018 @ 6:53 pm

Daniel, as a related aside, that Mattis is for the Iran deal does not in any way make him an insightful realist or less of a belligerent hawk than Pompeo.

Mattis swims in the same Swamp. Only he’s focused on different immediate targets – that Russia and China should be the center of U.S. militarist attention. So the trivial skirmish is merely a distinction without a difference within Trump’s inner circle of Neocon interventionists. I.e., an agreed upon War Machine driven foreign policy with some inside-baseball arguments on what to wreck first.

The taxpayers will lose big time either way. (And the co-opted MSM will keep them dazed and confused with Pentagon propaganda as it happens.)

#3 Comment By SDS On March 13, 2018 @ 7:47 pm

Can we assume Pompeo is just as ignorant as his boss; as well?


#4 Comment By Realist On March 14, 2018 @ 3:36 am

This country is on a crap slide.

#5 Comment By LouisM On March 14, 2018 @ 10:35 pm

I admire Tillerson for trying to be a peacemaker.

I don’t trust Iran. No one should while it is ruled by the mullahs BUT I don’t trust Saudi Arabia, Turkey or AIPAC warmongering neocons either.

I’m more afraid of internal leftists in the US, Canada, Europe and Australia/NZ than I am of Russia.

China is extremely dangerous but in an opposite way to Russia. If Russia is overtly seeking its expansion of power and appears more threatening than it is (think mouse shadow) then China is COVERTLY seeking its expansion of power in ways that do not appear threatening but are like using currency manipulation and production surplus’s to destroy native industries of its military threats and economic competitors, using immigration and investment as proxies for hegemonic political influence and control, etc. The Chinese are proving masters of using capital against capitalists.