Trump faces dangerous choices on Iran, Syria

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu captured international attention with his dramatic disclosure that Israel possesses 100,000 of Iran’s “secret nuclear files” taken from a compound in southern Tehran. Despite repeated denials and assurances from Iran’s Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei that “the Islamic Republic has never been after nuclear weapons,” Netanyahu confidently proclaimed, “Iran lied — big time.”

Despite the theatrics, supporters of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) argue nothing revealed in Netanyahu’s presentation, or the subsequent White House press statement, suggests that Iran is currently in violation of the nuclear agreement. Moreover, they contend that these revelations underscore the importance of retaining the JCPOA and its robust verification procedures that Secretary of Defense James Mattis believes is “written almost with an assumption that Iran would try to cheat.”

{mosads}On the day after Netanyahu’s speech, the International Atomic Energy Agency reiterated that it had “no credible indications of activities in Iran relevant to the development of a nuclear explosive device after 2009.” In a recent interview, the chief of general staff of the Israel Defense Forces, Gadi Eizenkot assessed: “Right now, the agreement, with all its faults, is working and is putting off realization of the Iranian nuclear vision by 10 to 15 years.”  

Conversely, opponents of the JCPOA argue that Tehran’s failure to declare the possible military dimensions of its nuclear program (Project Amad) in 2015 is prima facie evidence of its non-compliance with the agreement. Regarding the veracity of Netanyahu’s accusations, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo said: “I have personally reviewed many of the Iranian files. Our nonproliferation and intelligence officials have been analyzing tens of thousands of pages and translating them from Farsi. We assess that the documents we have reviewed are authentic.” He added that the “deal was not constructed on a foundation of good faith or transparency. It was built on Iran’s lies.”

Netanyahu’s speech comes during a period of last-minute diplomacy and consultation ahead of the May 12 deadline for President Trump to decide whether to extend the waiver on economic sanctions for Iran or withdraw from the JCPOA. Despite his close personal relationship with French President Emmanuel Macron, who made the case for working on a “more comprehensive deal” without abandoning the JCPOA, a theme echoed by German Chancellor Angela Merkel during her brief White House visit, it seems likely that Trump will walk away from the nuclear agreement.  

While this no doubt would please Netanyahu, the prime minister also is contending with a growing Iranian military presence in Syria that represents a potentially existential threat for Israel. Last month, Israel reportedly attacked the T4 airbase in Homs, targeting advanced air defense systems and killing seven IRGC soldiers, including the commander of a drone unit that infiltrated northern Israel in February. Subsequent strikes included a Syrian army base in Hama suspected of housing an underground surface-to-surface missile production facility used by Iran and its proxies.

The Trump administration supports Israel in combatting Iran’s “destabilizing and malign activities” in the region. During his visit to Israel, Pompeo announced that “the United States is with Israel in this fight, and we strongly support Israel’s sovereign right to defend itself.” Given the heightened tensions and possible retaliation by Iran for the recent air and missile strikes, there is a real risk of miscalculation that could lead to conflict and rapidly escalate across the region.  

Perhaps wary of being drawn into such a conflict, Trump surprised his senior advisers by expressing a desire to withdraw U.S. troops from Syria. Prior to the recent U.S.-led air and missile strikes against suspected Syrian chemical facilities, Trump froze $200 million in foreign aid and announced, “We’re knocking the hell out of ISIS. We’ll be coming out of Syria, like, very soon. Let the other people take care of it now.”  

Such statements are worrisome for Israel. Yaakov Amidror, Netanyahu’s former national security adviser, laments that “the consequences [of Trump’s statements] are clear. Israel may find itself having to do the critical job of containing Iran in the Levant by itself.” Netanyahu reportedly held a “tense” telephone call with Trump last month and expressed these concerns.

Additionally, Saudi Arabia’s Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman said, “We believe American troops should stay for at least the mid-term, if not the long term.” Ever the dealmaker, President Trump recently remarked, “Saudi Arabia is very interested in our decision, and I said, ‘Well, you know, you want us to stay, maybe you’re going to have to pay.’”

Unfortunately, deals and airstrikes alone do not constitute a strategy, and Dov Zakheim prudently calls for “a coherent approach to the increasingly volatile confrontation between Israel and Iran.”  Currently, the administration is trying to determine the geopolitical endgame in Syria and Mattis told reporters in the Pentagon, “We do not want to simply pull out before the diplomats have won the peace. You win the fight [against ISIS] — and then you win the peace.”

Additionally, keeping U.S. troops in Syria helps to contain Iran’s rising ambitions while assuaging Israeli (and Saudi) security concerns.  

Clearly, the Trump administration has to make some difficult decisions regarding the future of the JCPOA and Syria that will affect the Middle East for the foreseeable future. There are no easy choices; all are fraught with risk. However, the situation demands steady U.S. leadership and realistic expectations that are guided by its national interests.  

Jim Cook is an associate professor of national security affairs at the U.S. Naval War College, where he specializes in strategy, military force planning and the Middle East. A retired Army lieutenant colonel, he has served in a variety of command and staff assignments in the United States, Europe and the U.S. Central Command region, most recently in Afghanistan. The views expressed here are his own.