Will Johnson Kill JCPOA on Trump’s Behalf?

Date: 09 February 2020 - 22:28

News ID: ۷۵۹۹۸

WASHINGTON (The Hill) -- With the United Kingdom’s exit from the European Union freshly behind him, the British prime minister has an unusual opportunity to continue his differentiation from standard EU politics. One move he might consider would put him in Donald Trump’s good graces. Trump pulled the United States out of the Iran nuclear accord, which he called a "horrible, one-sided deal,” but he never killed it outright. Instead, the U.S. president deferred to British, French, and German wishes that the U.S. not invoke the nuclear deal’s "snapback” clause, which would have permanently buried it. After leaving the EU, Johnson is more eager than ever to secure a favorable trade deal with Washington. Triggering the nuclear agreement’s "snapback” clause may be the perfect way to put Trump in a good mood for negotiations.
Iran has scaled back its commitments as a means to protest Trump’s ever-harsher sanctions. On Jan. 14, the European parties to the deal or "E3” announced they were invoking the accord’s dispute resolution process. This is a major departure for the Europeans, who have been extraordinarily protective of the agreement known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA). Still, if the E3 act in concert, they could drag out the dispute resolution process indefinitely. However if Johnson refuses, the deal could be dead in as little as 30 days. In the months ahead, the JCPOA may be on borrowed time.
Despite long supporting the JCPOA, Johnson recently told BBC News, "If we’re going to get rid of it, let’s replace it and let’s replace it with the Trump deal.” Trump took immediate notice of Johnson’s comment, tweeting, "I agree!”
The E3 initiated the JCPOA’s dispute resolution process after Iran completed its step-by-step suspension of many of its nuclear commitments. Most recently, on Jan. 5, Tehran stated that it would no longer abide by any of the agreement’s uranium enrichment-related restrictions. To date, it has surpassed the JCPOA’s limits on the level of uranium enrichment; exceeded the cap on the amount of low enriched uranium it may stockpile; deployed and tested more centrifuges than allowed; accumulated more heavy water than permitted; and resumed enrichment at the underground Fordow facility.
The JCPOA has included a three-step dispute resolution mechanism, where — by consensus — the first two steps can be extended indefinitely. However, a shortcut to terminating the deal requires just 30 days. Rather than wait out the dispute resolution process, any party to the JCPOA can send a matter to the United Nations Security Council (UNSC), where a vote must be held within 30 days to preserve the deal, or all previous UN resolutions and sanctions would come back into effect. In diplomatic parlance, this became known as the JCPOA’s snapback mechanism.
So, is Johnson amenable to helping Trump terminate the deal? Certainly, his political thinking closely aligns with Trump’s. Leading the UK’s departure from the European Union, Johnson has made clear that he, too, shirks multilateral institutions in favor of national

interests. High on his priority list is securing a trade deal with America, since the prospects of reaching one with the EU appear troubled.
Yet, Johnson also values his ties with France and Germany. Thus far, solidarity with Paris and Berlin has been his approach. As recently as 2018, the prime minister penned an entire column defending the JCPOA, insisting, "every available alternative is worse.” Going out on his own to end the deal at Trump’s behest would mark a major shift with costly ramifications for maintaining his EU relationships.
Prior to the BBC interview where Johnson suggested replacing the JCPOA with a "Trump deal,” the president tweeted he "couldn’t care less” if Iran ever negotiates a new agreement. By showing contempt for diplomacy, Trump could risk UK support.
The Iranian government, for its part, is betting on Europe to slow-roll the dispute resolution process as all JCPOA parties await the outcome of the U.S. presidential election in November. That may be a foolish bet. At any point in 2020, Trump or his growing ally Johnson could initiate a snapback.