In 2018, the United States walked away from the Iran nuclear deal, the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA). The 2015 agreement that President Obama signed was rejected by the Trump administration, which argued the deal was flawed at its core. Trump insisted the deal delayed, rather than dismantled, Iran’s nuclear ambitions, ignored ballistic missiles, and turned a blind eye to Tehran’s regional aggression.

Eight years later, the uncomfortable question is not why the United States left the deal, but whether leaving it made war with Iran more likely.

The answer, Operation Epic Fury, is a resounding yes.

The Case for Leaving Was Not Irrational

Critics of the JCPOA were not wrong about its limitations. The agreement imposed real yet temporary constraints. Key provisions such as enrichment levels, centrifuge use, and stockpiles, were designed to expire. Iran’s nuclear infrastructure was reduced but not dismantled.

Even worse, the deal treated Iran’s nuclear program in isolation. It did nothing to address the Islamic Republic’s expanding ballistic missile arsenal or its growing network of proxies: Hezbollah in Lebanon, militias in Iraq and Yemen and its support of Hamas in Gaza. For many in Washington and Jerusalem, this was not a comprehensive solution.

From that perspective, withdrawal was framed as a strategic risk. The goal was to apply maximum economic pressure, force Iran back to the table and negotiate a broader, longer, and stronger agreement. It was a coherent theory. However, it didn’t work.

From Containment to Acceleration

What followed was not a better deal, but the gradual collapse of the constraints that had existed. Within a year, Iran began........

© The Times of Israel (Blogs)