Brett McGurk is a CNN Global Affairs Analyst who served in senior national security positions under President George W. Bush, Barack Obama, Donald Trump and Joe Biden.
CNN
–
As we approach the 10th day of the Israeli and Iran crisis, the focus is on whether diplomacy can be successful, and if not, whether President Donald Trump will make the decision to use US forces to destroy Iran’s nuclear infrastructure, particularly the rest of the deeply buried enriched facility known as the Fordaw.
Things appeared to have reached steady state on Saturday, two days after Trump gave him two weeks to test diplomacy. This includes Israeli control of prominent targets at Iran’s sky and will, and Iran can launch missile barrages in Israel with a small number of people. Military, the equation ultimately supports Israel, and its position is likely to be further strengthened this week.
But it is a tactical equation, and does not lead to a clear strategic endgame, especially when it comes to Iran’s nuclear program. So where is this crisis heading? Four possible scenarios are displayed.
This remains a favored outcome. But after this week’s talk in Geneva between Iran and European allies, it’s not well-populated. Those lectures went anywhere. Iran held its position even before the crisis. The United States did not exist. And the whole background of the Intercontinental hotel in Geneva, where Iran’s nuclear deal was negotiated a decade ago, reminded me of another era.
There may be more direct engagement on the US and Iran (probably through Katalis and Omanis), but other than that, the diplomatic truck has no real traction. This is a shame as this is the best way to end the crisis. All Iran needs to do is signal Trump envoy Steve Witkov that he is ready to agree to the proposal he presented to Iran about six weeks ago.
The proposal reportedly was balanced, with Iran abandoning its enrichment programme, but over time, as part of an international consortium that supplies nuclear fuel to a peaceful and monitored private nuclear programme.
Iran’s refusal to directly participate in the proposal, both before the crisis and especially before a fatal and fateful mistake, especially before the now. If there is one off-ramp available, this is this.
The US continues to position military assets in the Middle East, and soon there will be three career strike groups in theaters. This is a massive power show and has not been seen since 2012 at another point in another stopping diplomacy with Iran, particularly regarding its nuclear program.
Trump clearly gave orders to place and prepare strikes. It will help strengthen diplomacy as Iran must know at the end of its two-week deadline. The United States is ready to use force to render the Fordau inoperable, and Iran has no opportunity to defend such an operation. The more the US prepares for such an operation, the more likely it is that Iran is finally ready to make a deal that the US can accept.
CNN Global Affairs Analyst says we are “military operations in place” for strikes at Iran’s nuclear facilities
As Anderson Cooper and I argued shortly after Trump declared a two-week time slot, “diplomacy with deadlines” is effective, and the accumulation of the military serves the dual purpose of preparing for strikes while strengthening the diplomatic track. At the end of this period, Iran must understand that there are no enrichment facilities in Fordow, currently no 10 advanced centrifuge enrichment facilities.
It could be diplomatically (preferred) or military archived.
Trump has ordered strike positioning, but it is unclear whether he is the final order.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said on Friday that Israel may have a way to take the Fordaw without the United States. This may look like the “manipulation in many ways” discussed last week in the AC360. Many methods were Israeli commando attacks on Iranian missile facilities that were buried deeply in Syria last September.
The facility was roughly as deep as Fordow, and naming the “many way” operation was a signal that Israel had it in terms of destroying deep buried facilities.
However, I doubt the feasibility of such an operation in Iran. It’s high risk and wide distance. Nuclear enrichment sites are also very different from missile facilities. But there is no doubt that the Israelis are considering all the options here. They don’t want to just complete the military campaign at the Fordor facility. So, if Americans stay on the sidelines, expect Israelis to try something for themselves at Fordau.
I believe that in the wake of either the two or three above, Israel can declare the end of its major operation. Iran responds, but from an Israeli and US perspective, there will be an endpoint when the Fordau is demolished along with the already damaged Natantz and Isfahan’s other major nuclear facilities.
Besides the three options mentioned above, the most likely course is that the crisis simply follows. That means Israel continues to control Iran’s airspace. It continues to attack the target. Iran continues to collect barrages from time to time, but its missile stockpiles (and launchers run out).
This scenario is a critical end with Iran still having a massive enrichment capacity, but Israel is making sure it’s not used beyond Iran as fledgling diplomacy continues in the background.
My rating: At this stage, I think you’ll most likely see either option 2 or option 4 while continuing to do everything you can to push option 1.
So, given that the favorable endgame is diplomacy, how will diplomacy be cheered up next week, as meetings are not yet going anywhere?
First, the US needs to make it clear that if the two-week deadline is realistic and Iran refuses to engage constructively, the strike will be an inevitable consequence of Iran’s own poor choice. That deadline is the best chance possible for a diplomatic off-ramp, along with a reliable offer to Iran that has been on the table even before the crisis.
Second, it’s more creative possibilities. Sometimes in a crisis, you may want to expand the set of problems. Here, it means Gaza. The Gaza conflict is underway against the backdrop of the Iranian crisis. Now, in exchange for Hamas releasing half of the living hostages, there is a contract at a table supported by Israel for a 60-day ceasefire in Gaza (10 out of 20). Hamas refused the deal, but before Israel attacked Iran and many of its Iranian supporters were dismissed, including the leader of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard.
My experience in Hamas is that when the allies lead to defeat, as happened earlier this year, after Israel in Lebanon’s defeat in Hezbollah and subsequent suspension contracts in Lebanon, they are much more flexible when they bring about defeat.
Therefore, one idea could be a 60-day freeze of enrichment in Iran, with the aim of finding a permanent solution at the end of this two-month period, along with a 60-day ceasefire in Gaza. Israel is in such a strong position, which could be blessed with, allowing the United States to help ease the wider Middle Eastern crisis and to help Iran and Hamas mediate it in ways that are not reorganized.
After all, the fastest way to end the horror in Gaza is for Hamas to release just 10 hostages, and the fastest way to end the crisis with Iran is to accept the deal Iran proposed earlier this year. Trying these together may be beneficial, especially since both Iran and Hamas are at their weakest states in years.
At the bottom, Trump bought time and space at his “two weeks” deadline, preferring diplomatic resolutions. But three days after that, there appears to be little momentum in the diplomatic truck, despite the US military continuing its massive accumulation in the region.