Mark Fitzpatrick

Sanctions on Iran: Defining and Enabling ‘Success’

concerned about this prospect have centred on sanctions as their favoured policy tool. Critics find this foolhardy because they see no obvious signs that sanctions are working, other than to impose hardships on ordinary Iranians. It is indisputably true that sanctions have not achieved their strategic goal of changing Iran’s nuclear policy. Nor have they met tactical success in inducing Iran to enter into negotiations on its nuclear programme. But sanctions are helping to limit Iran’s ability to quickly assemble a nuclear arsenal. They are also creating conditions for an eventual negotiated solution, if the muddled politics of Tehran ever allow it. Meanwhile, various measures can be taken at the level of individual companies and countries to strengthen sanctions implementation.

Iran: The Fragile Promise of the Fuel-Swap Plan

Tehrans agreement in principle in October 2009 to a US proposal to exchange the bulk of Irans stockpile of low-enriched uranium (LEU) for replacement fuel for the Tehran Research Reactor sparked a global surge of optimism. From the start, however, the deal was tangential to the main issues at stake, and it offered only temporary respite from the growing threat posed by Irans fissile-material production programmes. Over the course of the winter, the confidence-building advantages foreseen for the deal have been replaced by still more mutual suspicion. The new version of the fuel-swap deal negotiated by the presidents of Brazil, Turkey and Iran in May 2010 is less attractive on non-proliferation grounds, but on balance will be a plus if Iran is willing to export LEU and if it agrees to stop enriching to 20%. Unfortunately, however, the deal is likely to fail over the same disparity in goals that has frustrated all negotiation efforts to date over Irans nuclear programme. If diplomacy and strong sanctions do not persuade Iran to accept conditions that would protect against nuclear-weapons break-out, there may be other ways to keep the capability latent. But Irans lack of restraint risks triggering military action.

Iran: A Good Deal

Criticising the Iran deal for failing to achieve zero enrichment is equivalent to arguing against any diplomatic outcome

Overwhelming Global Vote for the Iran Nuclear Deal

The issue is one of time: how long it would take Iran to produce nuclear weapons. The Geneva deal stops the clock, and even turns it back a bit.

The Ukraine Crisis and Nuclear Order

On some issues, particularly Iran, the fallout has been negligible, yet there is still reason for concern. The gravest dangers are the devaluing of security assurances and cracks in the credibility of extended deterrence.

Destroying Syria’s Chemical Weapons

There are many ways the plan could go wrong, but initially it has worked better than expected. If this positive course continues there will be far-reaching benefits.

Reinforce Rowhani's Mandate for Change

Irans new president made clear in his campaign that he would pursue purposeful negotiations with the West. Signals that sanctions relief is in the offing may encourage the Supreme Leader to go along.

Iran's Protests and the Fate of the Nuclear Deal

The Trump administration should continue to waive nuclear-related sanctions, lift the travel ban and support Iranian domestic freedoms.

Kim Jong-un's Singapore Sting

By talking directly with Kim Jong-un, Donald Trump did achieve something unprecedented, but it was all in Kim’s favour.

An Order of Priorities in Confronting Iran

It is far better to implement an incomplete but effective nuclear agreement than to scrap it, hoping to achieve the best outcome while ending up with the worst.