"*" indicates required fields

Subscribe

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

By subscribing you agree to our Privacy Policy

Subscription Settings
Analysis

Obama stakes his legacy on the nuclear accord

A huge political battle is looming in Washington over the nuclear agreement with Iran. In the short run, Barack Obama will win the fight with his opponents in Congress. But in the long run, the fate of the deal, his legacy, and perhaps the future of American foreign policy, will be decided by forces operating...

Hussein Ibish

5 min read

'U.S. President Barack Obama speaks during a news conference on the nuclear deal with Iran in the East Room at the White House on July 15, 2015 in Washington, DC. The landmark deal will limit Iran's nuclear program in exchange for relief from international sanctions. The agreement, which comes after almost two years of diplomacy, has also been praised by Iranian President Hassan Rouhani but condemned by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. (Photo by Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)'

A huge political battle is looming in Washington over the nuclear agreement with Iran. In the short run, Barack Obama will win the fight with his opponents in Congress. But in the long run, the fate of the deal, his legacy, and perhaps the future of American foreign policy, will be decided by forces operating beyond his control.

Anyone critiquing the agreement seemingly has an abundance of riches. It can be attacked as insufficient on inspections, rolling back Iran’s nuclear development, excessive sanctions relief (especially eventually lifting the UN arms embargo), and not accounting for what happens after its restrictions expire. But none of that is sufficient.

Mr Obama could veto any Congressional action – and a supermajority is almost certainly not available to the opposition. True, having to use a veto to protect his signature foreign policy initiative, would be embarrassing. But there is little doubt he will prevail.

Mr Obama has made an agreement on behalf of the US. For Congress to repudiate presidential judgment on a matter of this magnitude cuts deeply against the grain of American political sensibilities. Under such circumstances, presidents almost always get their way – and so will he.

The contours of the argument go something like this:

This agreement blocks Iran’s pathway to obtaining a nuclear device.

No it doesn’t. It’s full of loopholes. Iran can and probably will cheat. And, even if they don’t, it doesn’t roll back their nuclear programme enough.

What’s your alternative? War?

Not war. The real alternative is a better deal.

You can’t get a better deal. The only alternative is war.

Yes we could. Or at least we could have maintained the status quo, which is better than the agreement.

We can’t maintain the status quo because the most important international sanctions are fairly recent and will certainly disintegrate over the next couple of years if we don’t have an agreement, and we do not have the power or influence to maintain them.

At least we should try. The US has a lot of influence and we could continue to isolate and pressure Iran.

But none of that would do anything to stop their drive towards getting a nuclear bomb. And, anyway, we can’t maintain the most important sanctions. You’re basically warmongers – and totally unrealistic.

This is a capitulation to an extremist regime. There’s nothing more unrealistic than that. And what happens in 15 years? What’s to stop Iran from getting a bomb then?

That’s a good one. If they try, we’ll deal with it then. 15 years is a long time.

But they haven’t changed since 1979.

Well we will have the same options then as we do now. They will still be a year away from a bomb.

No, much closer then.

We will know everything that they are doing, and still have all our options.

If that’s a reductive caricature of the basic argument, it’s not by much. The administration’s case relies on the idea that there aren’t any reasonable alternatives to this agreement. The critique centres on the idea that no agreement would be better than this agreement.

Because so much depends on imponderables – what will happen during implementation, how will it will affect Iran’s regional conduct, what will Iran’s domestic politics and foreign policy look like in a few years time, and will the international community stick together if Iran cheats on the accord – that it’s really not possible for either side to prevail on the merits. It’s a gigantic gamble and the question is whether it is one worth making or not.

Divisions in Washington over the agreement arise from, and focus sharp attention on, an irreconcilable disagreement that has arisen in recent years about the very basis of US foreign policy. Supporters of the agreement insist that recognising the limitations of American power is essential to avoiding further foreign policy disasters driven by overreaching, such as the invasion of Iraq. Its critics hold that these limits are being exaggerated by a risk-averse and essentially timid approach that manages to be both reckless and naive.

The Iran agreement perfectly illustrates how Mr Obama is pioneering a new “right-sized” foreign policy that seeks to reconcile goals with resources, and regards imperial hubris as the definitive error. And it may prove to be its ultimate test.

Mr Obama has been a lucky politician all his life, rising step-by-step to the White House with blinding speed as opponents dropped out, self-destructed or simply couldn’t cut it.

Like Abraham Lincoln, his claim to national leadership wasn’t based on any record of accomplishment but rather on his speeches, which cast him as the right man at the right time.

But never has he trusted more to fortune’s favour. Given the gamble that Mr Obama has made, his international legacy, and maybe even his legacy as president overall, is largely, if not entirely, in the hands of an unreconstructed extremist regime in Tehran. And so, perhaps, is the future of his downsized American foreign policy.

This article originally appeared in The National.

The views represented herein are the author's or speaker's own and do not necessarily reflect the views of AGSI, its staff, or its board of directors.

Hussein Ibish

Senior Resident Scholar, AGSI

Analysis

Iran Takes a Huge Hit but Isn’t Doomed or Out of Options

President Trump's attack on Iran's nuclear facilities may or may not have irreparably damaged them, but the Al Udeid strike suggests Tehran is seeking to avoid a prolonged conflict with Washington.

Hussein Ibish

8 min read

President Donald J. Trump holds a meeting with White House Chief of Staff Susie Wiles, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff General Dan Caine, and other cabinet members in the Situation Room at the White House in Washington, DC, June 21. (The White House/Handout via REUTERS)

Is Trump Embracing a Regime Change Policy?

President Trump may be on the brink of getting the United States drawn into another "forever war," this time against Iran.

Hussein Ibish

12 min read

President Donald J. Trump speaks with reporters while flying aboard Air Force One en route from Calgary, Canada to Joint Base Andrews, Md., June 16. (AP Photo/Mark Schiefelbein)

Iran Is Attacked, the Gulf Reacts

AGSI explains what Israel’s sudden and massive attack on Iran is likely to mean for Gulf Arab states, Iran, the United States, and global and regional economies.

34 min read

Smoke rises after an explosion in Tehran, Iran, Friday, June 13. (AP Photo/Vahid Salemi)

A Path to a Stronger United States in the Gulf

AGSI offers pragmatic, targeted policy recommendations for the Trump administration to maximize U.S. political and economic influence with the crucial emerging regional powers in the Gulf.

20 min read

President Donald J. Trump, fifth left, attends a group photo session with Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, fourth right, UAE Crown Prince Khaled bin Mohammed bin Zayed al-Nahyan, second right, Bahraini Crown Prince and Prime Minister Salman bin Hamad al-Khalifa, left, Qatari Emir Tamim bin Hamad al-Thani, third left, Kuwaiti Emir Meshal al-Ahmed al-Jaber al-Sabah, second left, GCC Secretary-General Jasem Albudaiwi, right, during the GCC Summit in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, May 14. (AP Photo/Alex Brandon)
View All

Events

Jun 23, 2025

U.S. Strike on Iran: Regional and Diplomatic Fallout

On June 23, AGSI hosted a discussion on the United States' attack on Iranian nuclear sites.

President Donald J. Trump speaks from the East Room of the White House in Washington, June 21, after the U.S. military struck three Iranian nuclear and military sites, as Vice President JD Vance, Secretary of State Marco Rubio, and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth listen. (Carlos Barria/Pool via AP)
President Donald J. Trump speaks from the East Room of the White House in Washington, June 21, after the U.S. military struck three Iranian nuclear and military sites, as Vice President JD Vance, Secretary of State Marco Rubio, and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth listen. (Carlos Barria/Pool via AP)

Jun 16, 2025

Assessing Iranian, U.S., and Gulf Reactions and Options Following Israel’s Unprecedented Attack on Iran

On June 16, AGSI hosted a discussion on Israel's attack on Iran.

Rescuers work at the scene of a damaged building in the aftermath of Israeli strikes, in Tehran, Iran, June 13. (Majid Asgaripour/WANA via REUTERS)
Rescuers work at the scene of a damaged building in the aftermath of Israeli strikes in Tehran, Iran, June 13. (Majid Asgaripour/WANA via REUTERS)

May 15, 2025

Will Trump’s Visit Mark a New Chapter in U.S.-Saudi Relations?

On May 15, AGSI hosted a discussion on Trump's visit to Saudi Arabia.

Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman meets with U.S. President Donald J. Trump at the G20 leaders summit in Osaka, Japan, June 29, 2019. (Bandar Algaloud/Courtesy of Saudi Royal Court/Handout via REUTERS)
Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman meets with U.S. President Donald J. Trump at the G20 leaders summit in Osaka, Japan, June 29, 2019. (Bandar Algaloud/Courtesy of Saudi Royal Court/Handout via REUTERS)

Feb 4, 2025

After Assad: What’s Next for Syria and the Region?

On February 4, AGSIW hosted a discussion on the collapse of the Assad regime and the future of Syria.

Syria's de facto leader Ahmed Al-Sharaa attends a meeting with former rebel faction chiefs in Damascus, Syria, in this handout image released December 24, 2024. (SANA/Handout via REUTERS)
Syria's de facto leader Ahmed Al-Sharaa attends a meeting with former rebel faction chiefs in Damascus, Syria, in this handout image released December 24, 2024. (SANA/Handout via REUTERS)
View All