IRAN TESTS TRUMP WITH A MISSILE TEST
Fred Fleitz, Senior VP at the Center For Security Policy and an authority on the Iran Nuclear Agreement, and nuclear proliferation, will be the guest speaker at ICON on October 17, 2017 in Chapel Hill, North Carolina.THE WALL STREET JOURNALTrump’s Policy Turn on Iran
Treasury imposes new sanctions against Tehran’s ballistic missile program.
A long-range S-200 missile is fired in a military drill in the port city of Bushehr, on the northern coast of Persian Gulf, Iran, Dec. 29, 2016. PHOTO: ASSOCIATED PRESSThe world has been wondering if the Trump Administration will withdraw from President Obama’s nuclear agreement with Iran, and the answer appears to be no. That makes sense given the break it would cause with U.S. allies and the opening for Iran to make more mischief. But it does look as if President Trump may be willing to do what Mr. Obama refused to do, which is to rigorously enforce the agreement and push back against Iran’s aggression in the Middle East.
That was the message Wednesday when national security adviser Michael Flynn responded to Tehran’s latest ballistic-missile test by saying the U.S. had put Iran “on notice.” Mr. Flynn cited the missile tests and Iranian arms to the Houthi militia in Yemen but he offered no details on how the U.S. might respond. Then on Friday the Treasury Department followed through with a new round of sanctions on Iran’s global procurement network.
The new sanctions, which target 25 individuals and businesses, offer a revealing glimpse at the scope of Iran’s efforts to develop its missile arsenal. Beyond key Iranian figures, the sanctions hit procurement networks in China, Lebanon and the United Arab Emirates. Some provide Iran with ball bearings, composite fibers and other dual-use technologies; others funnel cash transfers and launder funds for terrorist groups such as Hezbollah. An array of front groups and shell companies cover the tracks.
The sanctions should put a dent in some of these operations, though illicit procurement networks are hard to prosecute and relatively easy to reconstitute. Few of the sanctioned entities have U.S. assets that can be frozen, nor are they likely to do business with Americans.
But the sanctions are notable for focusing on the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps. Eight IRGC officials and entities were sanctioned on Friday—a substantial addition to the 52 IRGC-related sanctions imposed by the Bush and Obama Administrations over the past 10 years. The IRGC’s elite Qods Force is responsible for supplying Yemen’s Houthis with weapons used against shipping in the Red Sea, including a suicide-boat attack on a Saudi frigate on Monday that prompted the Pentagon to order the USS Cole destroyer to the area.
Iran dismissed Mr. Flynn’s remarks, but the sanctions will get the regime’s attention. The question Iran will be asking now, as Mark Dubowitz of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies points out, is whether the new U.S. sanctions “are the beginning of a coercive strategy against Iran instead of the end of one as they were under the Obama Administration.”
Opponents of further sanctions argue that more coercion will embolden Iran’s supposed hardliners and lead to more aggressive policies. But it’s hard to argue that Mr. Obama’s policy of concession after unrequited concession has moderated Iran’s behavior.
One way the U.S. could respond to further Iranian provocations is by publicly supporting a Senate bill from Nevada Republican Dean Heller that would impose sanctions on large parts of the Iranian economy—metallurgy, computer science and more—involved in the missile programs. Two additional House bills target Iranian airlines used by the regime for military purposes and would help scupper the sale of Boeing aircraft to Iran.
Sanctions alone won’t stop Iran, however, and the Administration needs to consider a broader set of policy options. Mr. Obama used Iran’s New Year’s Nowruz celebrations in March to reach out to the Iranian regime. Mr. Trump can use the same occasion to speak up for the human rights of the Iranian people being repressed by that regime. Bolstering the U.S. naval presence in the Persian Gulf and changing the rules of engagement against IRGC boats harassing U.S. ships would help, as would greater assistance to Saudi Arabia in routing the Houthis in Yemen.
Iran’s missile launch is a deliberate effort to test the seriousness of the new U.S. Administration. Iran may now decide to test the White House again on how far it is willing to go to enforce the meaning of “on notice.” The more unequivocal the Administration’s response, the sooner Tehran will get the message that, this time, it faces a U.S. government that means what it says.
