The Trump Administration has just walked away from the United States’ commitment to the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), also known in the American media as “the Iran Deal.”After years of condemning what he has referred to as “the worst deal ever,” Trump finally withdrew the U.S. from the agreement, despite pleas from its other signatories and advice from experts.

President Donald Trump’s decision to leave a multilateral nuclear agreement with Iran may be a violation of international law that alienates the U.S. from a global community seeking to combat the proliferation of nuclear weapons, according to some experts.

What is the Iran Deal stands for:

The 2015 deal, officially known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) and struck between the U.S., Iran, China, Russia, Germany, France and the U.K. offered Iran billions of dollars of sanction relief in exchange for the halting of its nuclear production. After years of condemning what he has referred to as “the worst deal ever,” Trump finally withdrew the U.S. from the agreement, despite pleas from its other signatories and advice from experts.

The Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), known commonly as the Iran nuclear deal or Iran deal, is an agreement on the nuclear program of Iran reached in Vienna on 14 July 2015 between Iran, the P5+1 (the five permanent members of the United Nations Security Council—China, France, Russia, United Kingdom, United States—plus Germany), and the European Union.

Under the agreement, Iran agreed to eliminate its stockpile of medium-enriched uranium, cut its stockpile of low-enriched uranium by 98%, and reduce by about two-thirds the number of its gas centrifuges for 13 years. For the next 15 years, Iran will only enrich uranium up to 3.67%. Iran also agreed not to build any new heavy-water facilities for the same period of time. Uranium-enrichment activities will be limited to a single facility using first-generation centrifuges for 10 years. Other facilities will be converted to avoid proliferation risks. To monitor and verify Iran’s compliance with the agreement, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) will have regular access to all Iranian nuclear facilities. The agreement provides that in return for verifiably abiding by its commitments, Iran will receive relief from U.S., European Union, and United Nations Security Council nuclear-related economic sanctions.

But it’s not an informal “deal;” it’s a formal international agreement, endorsed by the Security Council of the United Nations, full of rigorous safeguards, duties, terms and conditions crafted through sophisticated, smart diplomatic hard work on the part of the international community. It can’t be easily set aside without undermining the UN, the international community, and the U.S. Constitution.

Is the JCPOA a legally binding treat or international agreement?

The JCPOA cannot constitute a treaty of the United States because it has not been presented to the Senate for advice and consent as required in Article II of the Constitution. This is important because the U. S. Supreme Court has not resolved whether the president is empowered unilaterally to withdraw the United States from a treaty that has been ratified by the Senate. The president has the authority to withdraw the United States from an international agreement other than a treaty unless a Federal statute provides otherwise.

As a political document, there is no legal prohibition on the president from withdrawing from the plan of action. The president has given his negotiators until May 12th to reach that agreement; the date upon which he is next required under Section 1245(d) of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012, codified at 22 U.S.C. & 8513a, to decide whether to renew the waiver of certain sanctions targeting the financial sector of Iran.

The particular manner in which President Obama crafted the Iran deal paved the way for President Trump to withdraw from it.  Obama made the deal on his own presidential authority, in the face of significant domestic opposition, without seeking or receiving approval from the Senate or the Congress.  He was able to do this, and to skirt constitutional requirements for senatorial or congressional consent, because he made the deal as a political commitment rather than a binding legal obligation.

But whenever a president makes an agreement as a political commitment rather than as a binding agreement under international law, he is making a tradeoff.  On the one hand, the president can avoid the need for approval from the Senate or Congress and make the international deal despite domestic opposition.  On the other hand, a political commitment has no binding force under international or domestic law—and there is thus a danger that it will not be honoured by a subsequent president.

How ugly is Trump’s action?

The Trump administration has presented its abrogation of the Iran Deal like a well-scripted reality show, playing to the audience it knows. But this is not a script; it has real consequences. It endangers the U.S.’s standing in the world, invites war mongers to fill the vacuum left by voiding the agreement, and threatens further destabilization to a region of the world already eyeing collapse.

By pulling out of the deal, the United States violated an international agreement it solemnly entered into, putting it in a class with nations that pointedly disrespect international cooperation, the rule of law, peace, and nuclear nonproliferation.  It’s not just a deal between the U.S. and Iran; by virtue of the UN Security Council resolution the deal is between Iran and the entire world. U.S. withdrawal demonstrates callous disregard for world opinion, and diminishes the world’s trust in America’s word, honour and commitments.

The possible aftermath of withdrawal:

Trump’s action rejects the existing means of ensuring a peaceful nuclear program in Iran.It breaks the U.S. long-standing tradition of cooperating with and honouring our solemn promises to partners such as France, Germany, the United Kingdom, and the entire European Union.It also obliterates technical obligations placed on Iran included in the general text of the agreement and five additional “annexes”.

The premature withdrawal dismisses the value of Iran rolling back its nuclear program by decreasing its nuclear stockpiles.  Under the deal, Iran removed the core of its Arak heavy water reactor and filled it with cement to ensure it could never produce weapons grade plutonium. It reduced its centrifuges, including removing the centrifuges in its underground Fordow uranium enrichment facility and refraining from enriching uranium there for 15 years. As a result, Trump’s miscalculated action discounts the value of the International Atomic Energy Agency’s competencies, expertise, and professionalism to monitor the agreement.

By LawZ Bureau,