Inconsistencies in Kamala Harris Policy on Iran nuclear deal
Posted on 28 Aug 2020; 02:00 AM IST. Last Updated 28 Aug 2020; 02:00 AM IST.Summary: In a recent news item on Aug 26, 2020 published in USA Today, Kamala Harris vowed support to Israel, and to protect it from Iran. On May 08, 2018, when President Trump withdrew from the JCPOA, Kamala Harris stated that the withdrawal jeopardizes US national security. While each of these statements appear perfectly valid, they could lead to inconsistencies, when viewed in combination, with the entire context of the Iran nuclear deal. The analysis revolves around Netanyahu’s assessment, that Iran could pose a threat to the world, with its ballistic missiles.
The world at large believes that President Trump did not withdraw from the Iran Nuclear deal (JCPOA), by himself, but it happened due to the insistence of Israeli Prime minister Netanyahu. In fact, “The Guardian” reported on May 01, 2018, that Netanyahu theatrics could become the reason for US withdrawal from JCPOA.
Netanyahu is a staunch critic of the JCPOA deal, and on May 08, 2018, when President Trump withdrew from the JCPOA, Netanyahu fully supported the decision, and stated that Iran is developing ballistic missiles with nuclear warheads, which could reach many parts of the world.
Senator Biden stands by the JCPOA, which the Obama era negotiated with Iran. On May 08, 2018, senator Kamala Harris criticized President Trump for the JCPOA withdrawal, and stated it jeopardizes US national security. On Aug 26, 2020, Kamala Harris vowed support to Israel, and to protect it from Iran.
While each of the above statements appear perfectly valid, they seem to lead to inconsistencies, when viewed in combination with the entire context of the Iran nuclear deal.
The Analysis
The analysis revolves around Netanyahu’s assessment, that Iran could pose a threat to the world, with its ballistic missiles.
Scenario-1:
If Netanyahu’s assessment, is correct, i.e. Iran poses a threat to the world, with its ballistic missiles, then the action of President Trump (i.e. withdrawal from JCPOA ), could also be considered as fair, and just.
In such a scenario, the criticism of Kamala Harris that President Trump’s withdrawal from JCPOA, “jeopardizes US national security”, appears inaccurate.
Scenario-2:
If Netanyahu’s assessment, is wrong, and if Iran poses no threat to the world, then it is the case that Netanyahu wrongly guided US and President Trump to a very undesirable and bungled up situation.
In such a scenario, how could Kamala Harris support Israel and Netanyahu, who have ruined US policy in Middle East?
Scenario-3:
Senator Biden’s continued support to the JCPOA, implies that he thinks Netanyahu’s assessment, is wrong, i.e. Iran poses no threat to the world.
In other words, the Democratic Party already believes that Netanyahu wrongly guided USA and President Trump, and could have inadvertently setup a host of ugly tensions in the Middle East, both for Israel and USA.
If this were to be the case, then USA would find itself, in ample mess, to pull itself through. In such a scenario, how could Kamala Harris make promises to pull Israel out of all the mess Netanyahu created?
Scenario-4:
Senator Biden continues to support JCPOA, despite knowing that Netanyahu’s assessment, is correct, i.e. Iran poses a threat to the world, then “All statements made by Kamala Harris” would be rendered as inaccurate.