The Fall of the JCPOA and Its Implications: U.S.-Iran Relations and Israel’s Security Concerns

The Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), signed in 2015 between Iran and six world powers (the U.S., U.K., France, Russia, China, and Germany), marked a significant diplomatic effort to curb Iran's nuclear ambitions. The deal, often referred to as the Iran nuclear deal, was hailed as a landmark agreement aimed at preventing Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons by restricting its nuclear program in exchange for relief from international sanctions. However, the deal unraveled under President Donald Trump’s administration, leading to a series of geopolitical shifts, heightened tensions in the Middle East, and complex dilemmas for the U.S., Iran, and Israel.

In May 2018, Trump made good on his campaign promise to withdraw the United States from the JCPOA. The move was based on his belief that the agreement was "flawed" and did not adequately address Iran’s regional behavior, missile programs, or long-term nuclear ambitions. Trump’s administration argued that the deal was a “sunset agreement”, meaning it placed temporary restrictions on Iran’s nuclear program but would eventually allow Tehran to resume nuclear activities, such as uranium enrichment, after 10 or 15 years.

The U.S. withdrawal from the deal, and the subsequent re-imposition of stringent sanctions on Iran, led Tehran to gradually backtrack on its commitments. Iran restarted its nuclear activities and began increasing its enrichment capacity, moving closer to the threshold of being able to produce weapons-grade uranium.

Under the JCPOA, Iran’s nuclear program was strictly limited. Iran agreed to:

Limit its uranium enrichment to 3.67%, far below the 90% needed for weapons-grade uranium.

Reduce its stockpile of enriched uranium to 300 kilograms.

Scale down its centrifuge program, dismantling thousands of its most advanced centrifuges.

However, after the U.S. withdrawal, Iran gradually began violating these restrictions. In 2019, Tehran started enriching uranium beyond the 3.67% limit, increasing enrichment levels to 4.5% and later to around 20% in early 2021. While this is still below the threshold needed for nuclear weapons, it represents a significant escalation, bringing Iran closer to the nuclear breakout time — the period needed to produce enough fissile material for a bomb.

In 2021, Iran announced it had installed advanced centrifuges at its Natanz facility, which significantly increased its uranium enrichment capacity. These actions have drawn intense international scrutiny, with fears rising that Iran might be closer than ever to obtaining the capability to produce nuclear weapons.

Trump’s decision to pull out of the JCPOA was part of a broader “maximum pressure” campaign designed to economically isolate Iran and force it to renegotiate the deal. The re-imposition of U.S. sanctions severely damaged Iran’s economy, driving inflation and reducing its oil exports to nearly zero. The idea was to use economic hardship to push Iran to the negotiating table, offering a better deal that would address Iran’s missile program, regional actions, and nuclear ambitions in a more comprehensive manner.

However, this strategy did not achieve its desired result. Instead of returning to the negotiating table, Iran took a more confrontational approach, increasing its nuclear activities and engaging in proxy conflicts in the Middle East. The Trump administration also failed to convince European partners to follow the U.S. lead, as European countries sought to preserve the deal and maintain their business interests with Iran.

Trump's policies further intensified tensions in the region, culminating in the assassination of Iranian General Qasem Soleimani in January 2020. This act of targeted killing escalated hostilities, bringing the U.S. and Iran to the brink of war, and left Iran with little incentive to return to a deal under the conditions set by the U.S.

Israel has been one of the most vocal opponents of the JCPOA. Israel views Iran’s nuclear program as an existential threat, given the Iranian regime’s repeated calls for the destruction of the Israeli state. Israel has long maintained that Iran’s pursuit of nuclear weapons would shift the balance of power in the Middle East and embolden Tehran’s proxy forces across the region.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was a staunch critic of the JCPOA and publicly warned that the deal would eventually allow Iran to acquire nuclear weapons. Israel's military doctrine has included a strategy of preventive strikes against Iranian nuclear facilities, and it has reportedly conducted numerous covert operations to sabotage Iran’s nuclear program over the years.

The U.S. withdrawal from the JCPOA and the subsequent escalation of Iran’s nuclear activities have confirmed many of Israel's worst fears. With Iran’s increasing enrichment capacity and missile programs, Israel has become increasingly concerned that Iran is moving closer to a nuclear weapons threshold. Israel has been vocal in urging the U.S. and other powers to take a tougher stance on Iran and to consider military action if diplomacy fails.

While Israel initially welcomed Trump’s “maximum pressure” approach, the continued instability and Iranian defiance have left Israel with difficult choices. The possibility of military intervention remains a significant concern, particularly as Iran edges closer to nuclear capability.

Under President Biden, the U.S. sought to revive the JCPOA, with negotiations resuming in 2021. However, the diplomatic environment remains fraught with challenges. While Iran is willing to return to the terms of the deal, the U.S. and its allies remain concerned about the long-term provisions of the agreement and whether Iran will honor the terms. As of 2023, the chances of a new deal remain uncertain, with Iran continuing to push ahead with its nuclear program.

Iran’s nuclear trajectory has already forced Israel to reconsider its strategy. While Israel continues to seek diplomatic solutions, the possibility of military action — either independently or with U.S. support — remains on the table. The U.S. also faces a balancing act: how to curb Iran’s nuclear ambitions without further destabilizing the region or pushing Tehran into full-scale nuclear weapons development.

Trump’s approach — prioritizing sanctions and isolation over diplomacy — has ultimately resulted in a more polarized, unstable situation in the Middle East. The collapse of the JCPOA and Iran’s increasing nuclear capabilities have not led to a clear resolution but rather a prolonged standoff with significant consequences for U.S., Israeli, and regional security.

The fall of the JCPOA and its aftermath have reshaped the geopolitical landscape of the Middle East. While Iran’s nuclear program continues to evolve, the choices facing the U.S. and Israel are stark. Whether through diplomacy, military strikes, or continued pressure, the future of Iran’s nuclear capabilities will significantly influence regional stability and U.S.-Iran relations for years to come.

The collapse of the deal has revealed the limitations of hardline approaches like Trump’s “maximum pressure” and the strategic necessity for balancing sanctions with diplomatic engagement. For Israel, the evolving situation remains a high-stakes challenge, as Iran’s nuclear trajectory continues to pose an existential threat to its security. With Iran potentially closer than ever to developing nuclear weapons, the next steps taken by both Tehran and Washington will have far-reaching consequences — not only for the Middle East but for the broader global order.