JCPOA 2.0: Trump's deal risks undercutting efforts against the Iranian threat - editorial

What's worse than giving Iran $6 billion? Giving it two $6 billions.The United States and Iran signaled last week that they were close to a deal, with reports suggesting it could be signed in Geneva this week.Alongside those announcements came accounts of what the framework may entail: a memorandum of understanding that would open another 60-day period of technical negotiations; the reopening of the Strait of Hormuz; possible access to frozen assets; discussions over dismantling Iran's nuclear program and disposing of enriched uranium; and broader understandings affecting Lebanon.Furthermore, Israel has not been a party to the talks, while Israeli officials have been left to repeat that US President Donald Trump understands Israel's concerns and conditions.If those reports are true, Trump's Iran framework is a disaster.An MoU can be useful when it locks in firm obligations. It is dangerous when it becomes the price of admission for concessions before the hard questions are answered.A 60-day process may sound orderly, but in the Middle East, 60 days is enough time for facts on the ground to change. Iran can move material, harden facilities, pressure mediators, and present every delay as proof that the other side is acting in bad faith.Reports of Iran booby-trapping tunnel entrancesPrevious reports have stated that Iran has already taken steps to seal off enriched uranium, including collapsing tunnels and booby-trapping entrances.

If accurate, it seems like Tehran is preparing to back out after US forces in the region have diminished and there isn't much to be done.Leaving ballistic missiles outside the core bargain would make the framework even weaker. Iran does not threaten Israel only through uranium enrichment. It threatens Israel through missiles, drones, Hezbollah, the Houthis, militias in Iraq and Syria, and the infrastructure that allows those forces to keep Israel under fire.A deal that speaks about nuclear material while failing to confront the delivery systems and regional networks built around it cannot credibly claim to guarantee Israeli security.The reported possibility of roughly $12b. in financial relief is troubling. Even if the Trump administration insists that money will be released only after Iranian performance, many of those who condemned the Biden administration for unfreezing $6b. in Iranian assets should view this as twice as dangerous.Tehran does not need a financial lifeline to become moderate.

It needs one to rebuild, rearm, stabilize the regime, reward loyal security forces, and restore the proxy networks that Israel and the United States worked to degrade.Such relief would also betray the Iranian people. They were told that the free world understood the character of the regime ruling over them. They were told that pressure on Tehran was aimed at the men who jail dissidents, brutalize women, impoverish citizens, and spend national wealth on foreign wars.A repeat of Obama-era agreementThis smells like JCPOA 2.0. The original nuclear deal was sold as a pragmatic way to delay Iran's nuclear ambitions.

In practice, it gave Tehran time, money, and legitimacy while leaving too much of its regional aggression intact.The current framework risks repeating the same mistake under a new label: early concessions, vague sequencing, delayed technical talks, hopeful enforcement, and a refusal to confront the full architecture of Iranian power.It is not enough for Israeli officials to say that Trump understands Israel's position.Understanding is not the same as agreement, and agreement is not the same as enforceable language. Israel will face the consequences if Iran cheats, if Hezbollah is strengthened, or if the northern border becomes another arena where Jerusalem is pressed to show restraint while enemies reload.The reported Lebanon component is deeply troubling. Any concession that pressures Israel toward a cessation of fighting in Lebanon without hard guarantees on Hezbollah disarmament, Iranian funding, and cross-border fire would weaken Israel's right to defend its citizens.No state can be expected to outsource the security of its northern communities to promises made by Tehran.All of this remains speculative. Predicting Trump is difficult even after he announces something, and reported terms can shift quickly.But if the reports are true, this is not a great deal.

It is a dangerous one, and it risks undercutting the enormous American and Israeli effort to weaken Iran's regime, disrupt its nuclear ambitions, and reduce the threats it poses to Israel, the region, and the world.