US sanctions against Iran at the beginning of November, targeting oil, energy, banks and shipping companies, were the last step in the Bush administration's push for pressure since Tehran came to power in early 2017, Trump management of the Iranian nuclear agreement in May 2018.

Trump's sanctions aim to increase pressure on Iran to force the Iranian regime to negotiate a better nuclear deal than the administration has withdrawn. US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo said the re-imposition of sanctions as part of the 2015 nuclear agreement is meant to ensure that the Iranian regime does not have much of its resources to support terrorism and other aggressive activities in the region, .

A complicated situation

Of course, reducing these resources is an explicit goal with a good chance of achieving the desired goal. As for the expected effects of sanctions as a means of pushing Iran to negotiate a new nuclear agreement, the situation is more complex. It depends on the assessments of the Iranian regime whether it can withstand the pressure, or the conclusion that it will not be able to do so, forcing it to make nuclear concessions to alleviate these pressures.

Looking at the impact of sanctions as the appropriate means of forcing Iran to negotiate, it is important to bear in mind that it is not the best way, and that it has a mixed record of forcing States to comply with all that is required of them. But the tools available to countries to try to influence other countries are limited, and sanctions are the most important form, with the exception of armed wars, to exert pressure. At present, imposing sanctions on Iran is the best hope of the Trump administration to change Tehran's views on the nuclear deal and its behavior in the region.

Indeed, empirical evidence shows that at some point in the history of dealing with Iran's nuclear ambitions since 2003, pressure has been the best strategy that has resulted in a positive change in the leadership of Iran in the nuclear field, where this change was consistent with the objectives of the international community. The Iranian regime has long considered incentives or so-called "carrots" to be a sign of the weakness of the international community and must be exploited, not a sign of good intentions that should be responded favorably. Various types of "carrots" and expressions of diplomatic cooperation have failed to convince the Iranian regime of the benefits of adopting a similar cooperative attitude towards international players who are trying to change Iran's behavior.

Change the policy

There is now an urgent need to change the international community's approach to Iran. First, Iran's comprehensive and joint plan of action with the international community in 2015, known as the Iranian Nuclear Convention, has serious flaws and Iran has shown no sign that it has retracted its nuclear ambitions. The nuclear archive, which was stolen by the Israelis from a Tehran warehouse and revealed publicly at the end of April 2018, indicated that Iran was still determined to achieve its military nuclear program. The main drawbacks of Iran's nuclear deal are the fact that it legitimizes Iran's uranium enrichment program to the extent that it allows research and development on a full range of centrifuges and does not include the development of missiles carrying nuclear weapons, Non-nuclear facilities, as Iran develops its military nuclear program.

In addition, in direct contradiction to the hopes and expectations of the administration of former President Barack Obama, the Iranian nuclear agreement has not resulted in a more moderate stance by the Iranian government, which has become more aggressive in achieving its ambitions in the Middle East.

However, despite the significant impact of sanctions on the Iranian economy, there are factors that make it more difficult to bring Iran back to the negotiating table these days. In 2013, as a result of harsh sanctions, the 5 + 1 countries - China, France, Russia, the United States, the United Kingdom and Germany - were in a better position to achieve an agreement with Iran. Iran was isolated at the time by these countries, and was seen as a dangerous and non-appeasement state. Unfortunately, these countries have now refused to participate in the imposition of sanctions on Iran, which was determined to get rid of sanctions in exchange for a simple nuclear concession. In such a situation, Iran felt that it was still strong and if it could use that force, it could extract many concessions from world powers.

Changing the policy is more difficult

Over the past few years the situation has deteriorated and the task of changing the world's approach has become more difficult. This is due to the progress achieved in the nuclear field, including the years following the signing of the nuclear agreement with the 5 + 1 countries, in the field of missile development, and in the research and development of centrifuges that Iran intends to operate over several years. In addition, as a result of Iran's nuclear agreement, Iran has become bolder, now enjoying the support of all 5 + 1 countries except the United States. This enabled Iran to focus on the international scene, and the United States became the isolated state, not Iran. Of course, China and Russia do not accept Trump's leadership of the world, and the Europeans are actively trying to undermine the Trump's sanctions on Iran.

Question mark

The economic pressure campaign against Iran remains the best and most successful option, among all the options that ranged from not doing anything under the illusion that "the Iranian agreement is successful" or through futile attempts to implement diplomatic cooperation with Iran and ending with the most Of military action. Therefore, all countries that are truly interested in curbing the proliferation of nuclear weapons should return to Trump's administration in its efforts against Iran and not isolate them. If pressure forces Iran to return to the negotiating table, the good outcome will depend on effective negotiating strategies and tactics, while absorbing important lessons from the failed negotiations that led to Iran's nuclear agreement.

- When looking at the effect

Sanctions as

Appropriate means

To force Iran to

Negotiation is important

Taking into account

It is not the means

Perfect, and enjoyed it

With a mixed record in what

Concerning the coercion of States

To comply with everything

Ask them.