In a recent statement on Iran’s civilian nuclear program, Secretary of State Antony Blinken advocated for the US to rejoin the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), the 2015 nuclear deal initially brokered between Iran and the P5+1 members: the five permanent UN Security Council members plus Germany.
Blinken's remarks follow the election of reformist President Masoud Pezeshkian in Iran, fueling optimism for ending Iran's isolation. Rejoining the JCPOA could be a significant step toward this goal.
This is not the first time Blinken has expressed support for the JCPOA, which the US exited in 2018. At the Davos 2024 World Forum, he called the withdrawal a “big mistake,” emphasizing the absence of crucial agreements.
Negotiated under the Obama Administration, the JCPOA aimed to provide sanctions relief to Iran in exchange for unprecedented oversight of its civilian nuclear program. However, the anticipated sanctions relief largely never materialized as the US failed to uphold its end of the deal and pressured other P5+1 nations against easing sanctions. Efforts to salvage the agreement faltered when the Trump Administration withdrew entirely.
Iran responded by withdrawing from some voluntary safeguards and increasing uranium enrichment. Despite this, Iran remains open to restoring the original JCPOA, with acting Foreign Minister Ali Bagheri reaffirming Iran’s commitment to the deal as written.
Contrary to Blinken's claims of Iran's imminent nuclear breakout capacity, Iran has not enriched uranium beyond 60%, far below the weapons-grade level of 90%. US intelligence reports have consistently confirmed that Iran is not pursuing nuclear weapons production. Blinken’s comments today, suggesting Iran could produce fissile material for a nuclear bomb within weeks, reflect a misunderstanding of Iran’s nuclear activities and capabilities.
Iran maintains that its actions are reversible and aimed at prompting negotiations, with no steps taken towards producing nuclear weapons. Blinken's rhetoric, suggesting an immediate threat, overlooks these critical details, underscoring the need for a nuanced understanding of the JCPOA's significance and potential revival.
