Come back when The Obama administration was negotiating a nuclear deal with Iran, I asked National Security Council officials: “Why are you spending all your economic power and political and diplomatic resources trying to stop Iran from developing a bomb it doesn’t have (and even if it does, it can never use), when those same resources could be mobilized to pressure Iran to end its meddling behavior that is destabilizing countries throughout the region?
With all this reservation, when the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action was announced, I supported it for three reasons. First, the “nuclear deal” was a negotiated settlement, which is always better than conflict.
And regardless The White House Spokesmen said otherwise, Catherine Ashton, a senior British diplomat involved in the negotiations, offered assurances that the deal was only the first step and that Iran’s behavior would be next on the agenda. My hope was that common sense would prevail and the process initiated could lead to a regional security compact and framework for peace.
The second reason was the way The Republicans were working overtime to sabotage the deal. It was unconscionable that they invited a foreign leader, the Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahuto address a joint session of Congress to urge members of Congress to vote against their president. This was an unacceptable interference in American politics.
The third (and perhaps most unexpected) reason was the reaction to the JCPOA inside Iran. In a poll we conducted months after the deal was announced, we found a significant shift in Iranian public opinion.
Our previous polls had shown that Iranians were largely in favor of spending the regime’s money on allies in Lebanon, SYRIAIraq and Yemen. With the hint of peace, Iranians turned their priorities inward, with declining support for the regime’s external involvements.
Instead of resources going abroad, Iranians wanted them to be used at home to create employment and opportunity. They also raised their demands for more personal freedom and political rights.
When, after the election of Donald Trump, he canceled the Iran deal and began to threaten the regime, we repeated the survey. The results were back. When citizens feel their country is being threatened, they tend to be less critical or “rally around the flag.”
In the following years, amid continued signs of hostility from all sides – the US, Israel and Iran – the situation has shown no promise of improvement. Despite promising a better deal, Trump has done nothing but deepen the animosity.
of The Biden administration was handed the unenviable task of resurrecting a dead agreement—a task to which they never seemed fully committed. For its part, Iran continued to behave as a regional bad actor, all the while threatening and building up its military capabilities.
Left alone, the Arab states of the Gulf sought to create stability out of the possibility of chaos with which they were forced to contend. Unlike Iran, which had decided to use its wealth to export its influence and anti-Western ideology, the Arab Gulf states had taken a different path, focusing on development, tourism and trade. Their continued prosperity required a stable regional environment.
And so, amid tensions between the US and Israel and Iran, these Arab states made diplomatic and economic overtures to Iran, hoping for a more secure environment in the Persian Gulf.
They even hoped that the lure of shared prosperity and security might induce Iranians to join them in pursuing a more stable and prosperous future and persuade Israelis to resolve the long wound of Palestinian dispossession and occupation, fostering the conditions for regional peace. It should not have had such a fate!
Israel wanted the economic benefits of regional peace, but was unwilling to play its part. It intensified its occupation and oppression and strangulation Palestinians. Then came October 7, 2023, and the region exploded.
In short, while Israel was waging a genocidal war in GazaIran’s ally in Lebanon engaged in a fatal and costly exchange with Israel to the north, a miscalculation with devastating consequences.
The Israelis launched a deadly bombing campaign, killing thousands of Lebanese, including the leader of Hezbollah. Months later, Israel and the US attacked Iran and killed Iran’s spiritual leader. Iran returned fire, sparking a wider confrontation.
The negotiations produced so-called “ceasefires” during which the Palestinian and Lebanese death toll continued to rise. When, prodded by Israel and Republican neocons, President Trump decided to “finish the job” by defeating the Iranian regime, the conflict took on a new character.
Iran intensified its attacks on neighboring Arab Gulf states hosting US bases and closed the Straits of Hormuz, cutting off 20% of the world. oil and gas supplies and adversely affecting the economies of the Gulf region.
Reading some of the Israeli, Arab and American press is enough to make one pull out one’s hair. Some far-right Israeli commentators (and their Americans neocon collaborators) remain convinced that all that is needed is another massive bombing campaign, along with a few more “targeted killings” – as if those tactics, which Israel has used repeatedly, will be any more successful than they have been in the past.
Meanwhile, hard-line Arab pundits celebrate the “brilliantness” of Iran’s tactics. It is hard to see how antagonizing their neighbors and jeopardizing their own and the region’s economic future can be construed as anything other than reckless.
The American media is even more confused, with its apparent addiction to breathlessly and uncritically following the barrage of confusing and contradictory posts coming from the president.
And so, a decade after the JCPOA, the Middle East and the Gulf region are in a more insecure place than ever. Although the situation is much more complicated than a decade ago and hostilities on all sides much deeper, the way forward is to recognize that piecemeal approaches to the region, playing catch-up, have only made the region less secure.
As difficult as it may be to imagine now, what will be required is to work towards a regional security framework built on non-aggression, non-interference and respect for the sovereignty of all states, as well as an end to the occupation and denial of Israel. Palestinian rights.
This implies the recognition that there is no military solution to the region’s political issues. In fact, each round of violence only exacerbates existing problems. It’s a tall order that requires smart, bold and visionary leadership. This may not exist today, but it is necessary – and it is the goal towards which we must direct our efforts.
Dr. James J. Zogby is the author of Arab Voices (2010) and the founder and president of the Arab American Institute (AAI), a Washington, DC-based organization that serves as the political and policy research arm of the Arab American community.
