Some experts say that Democratic lawmakers and the Biden administration missed key opportunities to shift course on Iran, with the result of a deepening crisis shaped by a longstanding reluctance or refusal to prioritize diplomacy. In 2024, Sina Toossi wrote that President Biden’s approach to Iran was “particularly self-defeating.”
SINA TOOSSI; [email protected]
Toossi is a senior non-resident fellow at the Center for International Policy and the author of Dissident Foreign Policy.
STEPHEN ZUNES; [email protected]
Zunes is a professor of politics and program director for Middle Eastern Studies at the University of San Francisco.
Toossi told the Institute for Public Accuracy: “Democrats in Congress and the Biden administration both had opportunities to break from the failed ‘maximum pressure’ approach on Iran, but neither ultimately did so in a decisive way. In Congress, many Democrats were wary of appearing weak on Iran and leaned into the idea that Trump’s approach could be used as leverage for a ‘better deal,’ even after it was clear that this approach had already backfired. That political caution helped entrench a broader Washington consensus that prioritized performative ‘toughness’ over strategic realism.
“The Biden administration, for its part, came in with the stated intention of returning to the nuclear deal, but quickly fell into the same trap. Instead of moving early to immediately reenter and rebuild credibility, it treated Trump-era sanctions as negotiating leverage and sought additional concessions. That approach misread both the balance of leverage and the depth of Iranian distrust after the U.S. withdrawal from the deal. By the time serious negotiations got underway, the diplomatic window had narrowed and Iran’s internal politics had shifted in a more hardline direction.
“Iran has long served as a convenient bogeyman in American politics across both parties, an easy target for signaling toughness with little domestic cost, and that dynamic has made it safer for policymakers to double down on pressure than to pursue diplomacy even when the former is clearly failing. What is framed as ‘strength’ often reflects a bipartisan reluctance to adjust policy to reality. The result is a broader failure of political courage in Washington that has sustained a cycle of escalation, drawing the United States into yet another costly and unnecessary Middle East conflict that does nothing to advance American security or prosperity and was never meaningfully debated, let alone supported, by the public.”
Zunes commented: “While the vast majority of Democratic leaders have expressed opposition to the U.S.-Israeli war on Iran, the Democratic Party nevertheless shares responsibility for the unfolding disaster. For more than twenty years, Democratic leaders––in Congressional resolutions, public statements, and party platforms––have issued alarmist statements about Iran’s capabilities and intentions, pursued punitive policies, and threatened war. In the 2024 Democratic platform and in statements by Democratic Congressional leaders, Trump was attacked from the right for not being militaristic enough in dealing with Iran.”