|
Trending Topics
|
Why War Isn't Inevitable If Congress Rejects the Iran Nuclear Deal
(Wall Street Journal) Aaron David Miller - Much of the Obama administration's efforts to sell the Iran deal have involved shackling the public and congressional debate with the binary choice between a diplomatic solution and war. But is that really the case? A congressional override of the president's veto would make it impossible for the president to waive critical oil and banking sanctions against Iran, but other elements of the deal could kick in, allowing Tehran to benefit enormously. Iran is too clever to walk away from the prospect of trying to divide the P5+1. The Russians and Chinese, and possibly the Germans, are likely to support an Iranian campaign for partial relief from UN sanctions. The theory that conflict with Iran is inevitable rests on several highly arguable contentions. First is the assumption that Iran is willing to accelerate its nuclear program and to either break out or sneak out to a weapon and thus court a military response from Israel or the U.S. The second assumption is that Israel is itching for an opportunity to unilaterally strike Iran with or without Washington's approval. In the wake of a no vote by Congress, neither of these developments are certainties. And why would Iran want to provide justification for such responses as long as it could pocket the political and economic benefits that would flow from being cooperative? For Tehran, the smarter option in the wake of Congress blocking the accord would be to exploit the appetite for international investment and blame the failure of the deal on Washington. That's a more compelling choice for Iran's leadership than a headlong plunge into war. The writer is a vice president at the Woodrow Wilson Center for Scholars.