I’d argue instead that the JCPOA re-affirmed a process that slowly began in 2003, started again post-2011 Libya, and continued to show unreliability among US foreign policy and accelerated the process
-
-
-
If you look at how China felt about the Libya intervention specifically after they thought they agreed on no regime change, it’s clear that this then played into how they have approached US foreign policy since
-
Continuation/unreliability argument makes sense. Not happening in a vacuum. What stands out about JCPOA fallout is EU-China cooperation against US. Iraq strained Western alliance, but Libya was unified effort. Trump didn’t have to withdraw, but esp didn’t have try to bully EU.
-
Agreed, more acceleration of underlying dynamics than a qualitatively different shift. & the fact that no one in the administration seems to care is even worse.
-
Doesn't care, or doesn't get it? Not sure which is worse. Leaving TPP was big acceleration. Officials tried to keep US in JCPOA--Mattis, McMaster, Tillerson--but many have left. Once US out, options limited: Diplomatic/economic pressure on Iran, war, or admitting gross error.
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.