What Will Happen to the JCPOA with Trump's Victory?

Donald Trump, the Republican candidate in the U.S. presidential election, has openly expressed his opposition to the nuclear agreement between the P5+1 and Iran during three debates with Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton and in most of his speeches, stating that his first action upon winning the election will be to cancel this agreement. Mr. Trump considers the nuclear negotiations with Iran, which were concluded during Barack Obama's presidency, as one of the Democrats' misguided policies, in which his rival Hillary Clinton also played a role. Trump views the nuclear agreement as a form of capitulation by the Obama administration and Hillary Clinton to Iran, repeatedly emphasizing that this deal will empower the Islamic Republic in the region. In one of the debates, he addressed Mrs. Clinton, saying, "Look at the Middle East, you started the nuclear deal with Iran, another masterpiece, a country that was on the verge of collapse, their situation was so dire that they were suffocating under sanctions, and now as it stands, they will likely become a major power in the near future." The Republican candidate continues his fierce attacks against Barack Obama, promoting a decisive approach to Iran as one of his main policies. In his April 22 speech, he described Barack Obama's foreign policy as leading to the decline of America's power and status in the global community, stating regarding the nuclear agreement with Iran: "He made a disastrous deal with Iran, and we saw that they even ignored his terms before the ink was dry on the document. Iran must not be allowed to acquire nuclear weapons. Under a Trump administration, Iran will never be allowed to have nuclear weapons." Henry Barkey, head of the Middle East office at the Woodrow Wilson Center in the U.S., believes that Donald Trump does not have a coherent foreign policy and has turned attacking the nuclear agreement into one of his campaign tools because Iran is not a trustworthy country in the eyes of the American people: "I look at this issue from the perspective of the election campaign. He really has nothing to say about foreign policy, so he resorts to something he thinks he can comment on. Iran is not a popular country in America, so if you attack the nuclear agreement with Iran, you attract those who are suspicious of Iran. Can he cancel the agreement? Yes, he can, but the consequences will be disastrous, meaning you will witness a nuclear arms race in the region, and the Iranians will likely pursue the production of a nuclear bomb, and our situation will worsen as a result of this action. Do we really want to go to war with Iran to prevent it from becoming nuclear? I believe he hasn't thought about these issues. These are things he talks about easily. In my opinion, Mr. Trump's problem is that he doesn't think about foreign policy even for a day." On the other hand, Dan Arbelaez, a researcher at the Brookings Institution in Washington, believes that if Trump wins the election, he may be able to implement more sanctions against Iran: "From the very beginning, he said he would tear up the Iran nuclear agreement on day one. It is unclear how he can do this. Not only the U.S. but also five major world powers signed it. What does it really mean for the U.S. to withdraw? I don't know if he can legally and constitutionally do this quickly or if he can do anything at all. He said he would resume imposing severe sanctions against Iran. This plan is feasible because it has been discussed in the U.S. Congress, and there have even been recent discussions about Iran's missile program, human rights violations, and undermining moderate countries in the region, among other issues. Imposing more sanctions may be possible." In one of his speeches, Trump harshly criticized the nuclear agreement, stating that the Obama administration should have included other issues that Iran could address in this agreement. North Korea and Yemen are among the countries that Trump believes should have been included in the nuclear agreement to resolve crises in these countries. He cited the lack of inclusion of these issues in the nuclear agreement as one of the reasons for canceling the agreement and imposing more sanctions against Iran. Genio Abdo, a researcher on Islam and the Middle East at the Brookings Institution and the Atlantic Council, both of which are research organizations in international relations in the U.S., believes that given Iran's regional activities, Mr. Trump may be able to garner positive support from the U.S. Congress for imposing stricter sanctions against the Islamic Republic: "This possibility is greater for the simple reason that there was significant opposition in Congress to the nuclear agreement, and the events that have occurred since the signing of the nuclear agreement have shown that the benefits the U.S. government thought it would gain from this agreement have not materialized. There have been no benefits for regional peace because Iran's interference in the affairs of many Arab countries has deepened and increased, including Syria. Therefore, his statements on this matter have weight and are influential for several reasons: one, the nuclear agreement has not been in favor of Arab countries; two, groups in Iran that opposed this agreement have gained significant power; three, Khamenei has expressed dissatisfaction and even opposition to some of the terms of the agreement, and therefore, in this regard, Trump can garner significant support in the U.S. Congress against this agreement." Another issue that is repeatedly mentioned in Trump's speeches is the release of Iran's frozen funds and the payment of $1.7 billion to Iran: "One of the largest historical giveaways, including $400 million in cash that no one has ever seen, which later turned out to be a mistake and was actually $1.7 billion. I think it was for hostages – it certainly seems that way. So you ask yourself why they didn't make the right deal. This is one of the worst agreements ever made by a country in history." Kamran Dadkhah, an economist and professor of economics at Northeastern University in Boston, states that the cash paid to Iran relates to an old contract: "It was a deal for military and defense equipment that the U.S. did not execute after the hostage crisis. As a result, this money was held by the U.S., and the interest accrued on it has reached this amount. If he says that this aspect was a form of bribery, that can be accepted. Because the U.S. really did not need to put this in cash funds and deliver it this way." Donald Trump has described the release of Iran's frozen funds as one of the mistakes of the Obama administration and Hillary Clinton: "There is also the Iran deal that you are so fond of, where we returned $150 billion to them... Meanwhile, Iran, you made the dumbest deal. The Iran deal where you gave $150 billion with $1.7 billion in cash." Kamran Dadkhah considers the figure of $150 billion to be unrealistic, stating that the actual amount is much less than what Mr. Trump claims: "When Iran was exporting goods to India, China, South Korea, and elsewhere during the financial sanctions, they had no way to pay this money directly to Iran, and they were making some excuses, and thus kept the money in their banks. With the lifting of financial sanctions, these countries can now return the money to Iran. The figure that Mr. Trump mentions, $150 billion, is undoubtedly exaggerated. Even American officials and others have said that this could be around $50 billion." So far, Donald Trump has not answered questions about how he would cancel the nuclear agreement with Iran, what sanctions he would consider against the Islamic Republic, and how he intends to prevent the Islamic Republic from gaining power in the region.