We have been down this dangerous road before — with disastrous results. 

A nation with which we have a checkered history of relations, each side ramping up the rhetoric, making it more difficult for either to appear to back down. 

Any accidental incident or miscalculation could trigger a tragic war between the U.S. and Iran, another war that should not, and need not, be fought. For all its tremendous human cost, it would solve nothing, and likely make the Middle East situation worse.

President Trump is ostensibly resisting the push of National Security Advisor John Bolton and Secretary of Defense Michael Pompeo, who are ramping up the confrontational rhetoric. Bolton has long been hawkish toward Iran, urging regime change and aerial bombardment of that nation. Even the very conservative columnist George Will has called Bolton the most dangerous man in America.

During Trump’s presidential campaign, the president spoke against expansion of U.S. military action in the Middle East, and called the U.S. invasion of Iraq a tragic mistake. Many who opposed Trump agreed with that sentiment, even though there were no explicit plans on when and how to withdraw troops, demonstrating once again that it is much easier to get into war than to get out of it. Though Trump’s reluctance regarding further U.S. military action in the Middle East was welcome, his campaigning was inconsistent as he dismissed the Iran Nuclear Deal formed with the cooperation of western European nations, Russia and China, as “the worst deal ever.” It was as if anything that had something to do with Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, John Kerry, and President Barack Obama was, by definition, terrible, and he would “rip it up.”

The International Atomic Energy Agency and American intelligence affirm that Iran has lived up to its end of the deal. Trump kept his promise to “rip up the deal.” That promise is a prime example of a promise that never should have been made and, if made, should not have been kept. Trump’s initial Secretary of Defense James Mattis, a Marines general, along with former Secretary of Defense Robert Gates, urged keeping faith with the deal. 

These two men are no flaming liberals, nor are many others who recommended that the U.S. uphold its part of the bargain. 

When the Iran Nuclear Deal was completed and signed by all participants, Iranian businessmen and younger Iranians were literally dancing in the streets. Like people everywhere, they want a brighter future that could come about by greater integration into the world economy. 

As in all nations, in Iran there is a range and struggle for prevalence of viewpoints and philosophies. Hardline religious conservatives urged the moderate President Rouhani not to sign the deal, insisting that America can’t be trusted. By unilaterally withdrawing from the deal, Trump has cut the legs out from under Iranian moderates and has strengthened the hand of Iran’s hardline religious conservatives.

Along with ripping up the deal, Trump is reemploying sanctions on Iran, specifically regarding not purchasing its oil. Trump is pressuring other participants in the deal to do the same. In theory, other participants, including western European nations, could continue dealing with Iran. 

However, businesses in allied nations are succumbing to American pressure, seeing continued business with America more valuable than lost business with Iran.

The Trump strategy is based on putting sufficient pressure on Iran’s economy that it will force them to the table, presumably to make a deal that is better than the one that Trump ripped up. The entire flaw in this strategy is that nations don’t generally succumb to that type of pressure, seen as capitulation and weakening their hand. 

The tougher things become economically for Iranians, the greater voice it gives to Iranian hardliners. As other participants in the deal succumb to American pressure and participate in economic sanctions, the greater the incentive for Iran to resume its nuclear weapons program. Although up to now, Iran has kept its share of the bargain.

With Trump welching on the Iran Deal, tension rises. With Iran threatening to restart its nuclear program, tension further rises. The U.S. moves an aircraft carrier to nearby waters. There are rumblings, denied by Trump, about moving 120,000 troops to the Middle East. There follows sabotage of Saudi Oil Tankers, unconfirmed speculation that Iran is “sending a message.” 

Tension mounts; each participant reassuring the other that they will not back down. It’s doubtful the U.S. would be foolish enough to attempt a land invasion of a nation with triple the population of Iraq, and a greater rugged land mass. It’s more likely that it would be a bombing campaign concentrated on suspected nuclear facilities. This would not only kill untold numbers of civilians, but risks escalating chaos and broader war in the Middle East. We did not seem to learn that lesson from the ill-advised Iraq invasion.

While Bolton and Pompeo are ramping up the rhetoric, cooler heads are advising otherwise. Our European allies caution that the alleged Iranian escalation is exaggerated, if not existent at the point. Although Trump initially appeared to be countering Bolton’s bombastic rhetoric, he is now ramping up his own rhetoric.

Trump invited this escalating confrontation by, first, neglecting advice of those who urged him to uphold America’s side of the bargain; and, second, hiring John Bolton. Now we are approaching, if not already on, the dangerous road to a tragic war.

No international deal is ever perfect. Critics complain that it was good for just 10 years. But a lot can happen in that time, including the possibility of a more moderate Iran; if we give moderates a chance. Meanwhile, Iran’s nuclear development was stopped, the goal of the deal achieved. 

Regime change must come from within. Starving Iran into submission, and military invasion, is bound to fail, with tragic consequences. Victory on the battlefield doesn’t necessarily bring favorable outcome in the broader sense.

— John Waelti of Monroe, a retired professor of economics, can be reached at jjwaelti1@tds.net. His column appears Saturdays in the Monroe Times.