Would Biden Rejoin the Iran Nuclear Deal?

Biden giving a speech in March 2020 | AP/ Matt Rourke
Biden giving a speech in March 2020 | AP/ Matt Rourke
TT

Would Biden Rejoin the Iran Nuclear Deal?

Biden giving a speech in March 2020 | AP/ Matt Rourke
Biden giving a speech in March 2020 | AP/ Matt Rourke

With Biden having established a significant lead over Trump in the polls, many in the Middle East have been asking themselves how the former would deal with Iran, especially the Arab states that are threatened by Iran, and face problems that diplomacy has failed to solve.

In the latest opinion poll released by CNN, 53% of those polled said that they would vote for Biden in November, while only 41% said that they would vote for Trump. Trump is trying to mount a comeback, but it seems unlikely that he will manage the kind of significant achievement, neither domestically nor globally, needed to dramatically alter the numbers and overturn Biden’s lead, which is dramatic indeed.

Joe Biden supported the nuclear agreement that the Obama administration signed with Iran in 2015, and his position on sanctions raises many questions. Last April, he and several Democrats called for the easing of sanctions to allow Iran to obtain medical aid that would help it confront the coronavirus epidemic. He also criticized the cancellation of the nuclear agreement in 2018, which made him the preferred candidate in American circles that support a comprehensive settlement with Iran.

Nevertheless, it seems that two issues must be brought to our attention when assessing Biden's position on Iran in general. First, internally, the administration that will enter the White House next November, whether Republican or Democrat, will be faced with massive pressing challenges. These problems begin with the country’s catastrophic economic situation, with unprecedented unemployment rates resulting from the epidemic and its implications on the economy that was almost totally paralyzed. They extend to include the growing ethnic and class divisions between whites and blacks, rich and the poor and all other social and economic identities.

It goes without saying that the axis of American politics has been shifting away from external issues to domestic policies since the end of the Cold War at the latest. Voters' interest in foreign policy has significantly diminished, as some speculate about a "return to isolationism", a tendency that prevailed in the United States before the Second World War. Long overdue solutions to deep domestic issues will take precedence, as foreign policy will be of secondary importance to the administration.

Second, Biden’s position on Iran is nuanced, which contrasts with the current administration’s approach of total hostility. The American media’s "reference" for this divergence in approach is a television interview given by Biden’s foreign policy advisor Antony Blinken. In it, he declares that the United States, with Biden as president, would return to the nuclear agreement provided that Iran accepts to abide by it first and that Washington, with its partners, develops a stronger and longer-term agreement to monitor any Iranian activity that the West may deem unacceptable, while admitting that things have changed since the Trump administration withdrew from it and that complex new negotiations are called for. Another Biden adviser, Jake Sullivan, believes that both those who supported and opposed withdrawing from the agreement underestimated the efficacy of the new sanctions imposed on Iran by Trump, noting that they are “very effective sanctions, in the narrow sense of the word.”

Thus, the statements and declarations made by the Biden campaign have been contradictory and paint a complex picture that is very different from the widespread simplification that a Biden presidency would lead to the immediate lifting of sanctions and a return to the old agreement. The situation in the region and Iran has changed profoundly since 2018, due to the sanctions and the changing region’s political climate, to say nothing about the Iranian regime itself and the disputes concerning Ali Khamenei’s successor and the citizens’ restlessness.



Little Hope in Gaza that Arrest Warrants will Cool Israeli Onslaught

Palestinians gather to buy bread from a bakery, amid the Israel-Hamas conflict, in Khan Younis, in the southern Gaza Strip November 22, 2024. REUTERS/Hussam Al-Masri Purchase Licensing Rights
Palestinians gather to buy bread from a bakery, amid the Israel-Hamas conflict, in Khan Younis, in the southern Gaza Strip November 22, 2024. REUTERS/Hussam Al-Masri Purchase Licensing Rights
TT

Little Hope in Gaza that Arrest Warrants will Cool Israeli Onslaught

Palestinians gather to buy bread from a bakery, amid the Israel-Hamas conflict, in Khan Younis, in the southern Gaza Strip November 22, 2024. REUTERS/Hussam Al-Masri Purchase Licensing Rights
Palestinians gather to buy bread from a bakery, amid the Israel-Hamas conflict, in Khan Younis, in the southern Gaza Strip November 22, 2024. REUTERS/Hussam Al-Masri Purchase Licensing Rights

Gazans saw little hope on Friday that International Criminal Court arrest warrants for Israeli leaders would slow down the onslaught on the Palestinian territory, where medics said at least 24 people were killed in fresh Israeli military strikes.

In Gaza City in the north, an Israeli strike on a house in Shejaia killed eight people, medics said. Three others were killed in a strike near a bakery and a fisherman was killed as he set out to sea. In the central and southern areas, 12 people were killed in three separate Israeli airstrikes.

Meanwhile, Israeli forces deepened their incursion and bombardment of the northern edge of the enclave, their main offensive since early last month. The military says it aims to prevent Hamas fighters from waging attacks and regrouping there; residents say they fear the aim is to permanently depopulate a strip of territory as a buffer zone, which Israel denies.

Residents in the three besieged towns on the northern edge - Jabalia, Beit Lahiya and Beit Hanoun - said Israeli forces had blown up dozens of houses.

An Israeli strike hit the Kamal Adwan Hospital in Beit Lahiya, one of three medical facilities barely operational in the area, injuring six medical staff, some critically, the Gaza health ministry said in a statement, Reuters reported.

"The strike also destroyed the hospital's main generator, and punctured the water tanks, leaving the hospital without oxygen or water, which threatens the lives of patients and staff inside the hospital," it added. It said 85 wounded people including children and women were inside, eight in the ICU.

Later on Friday, the Gaza health ministry said all hospital services across the enclave would stop within 48 hours unless fuel shipments are permitted, blaming restrictions which Israel says are designed to stop fuel being used by Hamas.

Gazans saw the ICC's decision to seek the arrest of Israeli leaders for suspected war crimes as international recognition of the enclave's plight. But those queuing for bread at a bakery in the southern city of Khan Younis were doubtful it would have any impact.

"The decision will not be implemented because America protects Israel, and it can veto anything. Israel will not be held accountable," said Saber Abu Ghali, as he waited for his turn in the crowd.

Saeed Abu Youssef, 75, said even if justice were to arrive, it would be decades late: "We have been hearing decisions for more than 76 years that have not been implemented and haven't done anything for us."

Since Hamas's October 7th attack on Israel, nearly 44,000 Palestinians have been killed in Gaza, much of which has been laid to waste.

The court's prosecutors said there were reasonable grounds to believe Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former Defense Minister Yoav Gallant were criminally responsible for acts including murder, persecution, and starvation as a weapon of war, as part of a "widespread and systematic attack against the civilian population of Gaza".

The Hague-based court also ordered the arrest of the top Hamas commander Ibrahim Al-Masri, also known as Mohammed Deif. Israel says it has already killed him, which Hamas has not confirmed.

Israel says Hamas is to blame for all harm to Gaza's civilians, for operating among them, which Hamas denies.

Israeli politicians from across the political spectrum have denounced the ICC arrest warrants as biased and based on false evidence, and Israel says the court has no jurisdiction over the war. Hamas hailed the arrest warrants as a first step towards justice.

Efforts by Arab mediators Qatar and Egypt backed by the United States to conclude a ceasefire deal have stalled. Hamas wants a deal that ends the war, while Netanyahu has vowed the war can end only once Hamas is eradicated.