The Failure of US Policy and Iran

The tragedy of American policy toward Iran is that both parties can point to the failures of the other while ignoring the failures of their own approach. President Obama negotiated a nuclear agreement that provided Iran with access to more than $100 billion in previously restricted assets and broad sanctions relief, although U.S. officials estimated the amount immediately available was closer to $50 billion. Critics warned that the deal focused too narrowly on Iran’s nuclear program while leaving its missile development, terrorist proxies, and regional aggression largely untouched.

President Trump correctly identified many of the JCPOA’s weaknesses, but withdrawing from the agreement without securing a replacement ultimately failed to produce a better outcome. The “maximum pressure” campaign inflicted severe economic pain on Iran, yet it did not force Tehran to accept a broader deal. Instead, Iran steadily expanded its nuclear activities, increased uranium enrichment, deployed advanced centrifuges, and accumulated far larger stockpiles of enriched uranium than were permitted under the original agreement.

Now, more than a decade after the JCPOA was signed, the United States finds itself discussing another agreement with Tehran. Reports indicate that the Trump administration’s current negotiations could include access to approximately $25 billion in frozen Iranian assets, sanctions waivers related to oil exports, and nuclear restrictions in exchange for economic relief. While supporters view such an agreement as a pragmatic way to prevent escalation and slow Iran’s nuclear progress, critics see uncomfortable similarities to the very policies that Republicans spent years condemning.

The similarities between the Obama and Trump approaches are difficult to ignore. Both involve negotiations with Tehran. Both contemplate sanctions relief or economic concessions. Both seek limits on Iran’s nuclear program in exchange for economic benefits. The rhetoric may differ, but the underlying formula remains remarkably similar.

Today, Americans are left with an uncomfortable reality. The Obama administration’s concessions failed to moderate the regime, while the Trump administration’s pressure failed to permanently stop it. The result is a Middle East that remains unstable, an Iranian regime that continues to project influence throughout the region, and a nuclear challenge that is arguably more complex than it was a decade ago. Washington has spent years alternating between accommodation and confrontation without producing a durable solution.

What we are leaving future generations is deeply troubling. After years of negotiations, sanctions, threats, diplomatic reversals, and shifting strategies, the central challenge remains unresolved. Rather than delivering lasting security, both administrations ultimately handed off a larger problem to the next. The American people have invested decades of attention, billions of dollars, and enormous diplomatic capital confronting the Iranian threat, yet the issue remains as dangerous as ever.

For Israel, the lesson may be equally sobering. Successive American administrations have promised that Iran would never obtain a nuclear weapon, yet the threat persists. While cooperation with the United States remains vital, Israel cannot base its long-term security solely on the decisions of changing administrations in Washington. Every administration arrives with its own strategy, only for the next administration to reverse course. Ultimately, Israel must be prepared to defend itself and make difficult security decisions based on its own assessment of the threats it faces.

History may ultimately judge both the Obama deal and the current Trump negotiations not as competing successes, but as variations of the same imperfect strategy: offering economic incentives in exchange for temporary nuclear restrictions while leaving deeper questions unresolved. One offered relief without lasting security. The other offered pressure without a durable diplomatic solution. The consequence is a problem that remains unresolved, a threat that continues to evolve, and a burden increasingly passed to the next generation.