The article discusses the potential for a nuclear deal between the U.S. and Iran under the Trump administration. While Trump’s overtures offer hope for a deal, the administration’s continued pressure on Tehran through sanctions and airstrikes creates uncertainty. A war is undesirable for both sides, but Iran’s nuclear advancements increase the likelihood of conflict if negotiations fail.
The 2015 nuclear deal, although successful in imposing limitations on Iran’s nuclear program, was abandoned by Trump. Iran’s nuclear progress has since accelerated, putting it on the verge of becoming a nuclear power. The article highlights the time sensitivity of a deal due to the expiring snapback mechanism.
The authors suggest two critical aims for the talks: clarifying the format of engagement and defining the endgame. The article emphasizes that a complete dismantling of Iran’s nuclear infrastructure is unlikely. Instead, it proposes a focus on restrictions and transparency. It highlights the need for direct, high-level diplomacy, possibly involving a temporary suspension of sanctions in exchange for Iran halting enrichment.
The article stresses that failure to reach a deal would be catastrophic. A military attack on Iran might be ineffective, leading to short-term setbacks only. Such an attack could also escalate regional conflicts due to Iran’s capabilities for retaliation. The article concludes that while a deal is possible due to mutual incentives, a considerable chasm of mistrust must be overcome.