More than a half-year after Donald Trump took office, there is still speculation over whether his administration will jettison the 2015 nuclear agreement with Iran, known formally as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA). But, argue Eric Edelman and Charles Wald, this discussion is of secondary importance. The task for the White House is to devise a policy to prevent the Islamic Republic from getting nuclear weapons—something that a “dangerous deal that puts the U.S. in an impossible situation” failed to accomplish.

The Trump administration’s priority should be restoring leverage against Tehran . . . The first step is full enforcement of the JCPOA—including potentially re-imposing suspended sanctions in response to Iranian cheating—as a clear signal that Iran can no longer flout its nuclear obligations. . . .

American policymakers must also rebuild military leverage over Iran. Contingency plans to neutralize Iran’s nuclear facilities, if it materially breaches or withdraws from the deal, should be updated to reflect its growing nuclear infrastructure and military capabilities under the JCPOA. Just as it already appears to be doing against North Korea, the Pentagon must also develop credible capabilities in preparation for a possible shoot-down of future Iranian ballistic-missile tests. U.S. Navy ships must also . . . utilize rules of engagement to defend themselves and the Persian Gulf against rising Iranian harassment.

It is equally important that the United States work with its allies. The recent ten-year Memorandum of Understanding on defense assistance to Israel should be treated as the floor for cooperation, in particular on missile defenses shielding U.S. forces, Israel, and its neighbors from increasingly capable arsenals of Iran and its proxies. . . .

These concentric pressures—none of which violates the JCPOA—will help deter Iran from pursuing nuclear-weapons capability whether it complies, violates, or withdraws from the deal.

For some time, opponents of U.S support for Israel have been urging the White House to end the war in Gaza, or simply calling for a ceasefire. Douglas Feith and Lewis Libby consider what such a result would actually entail:

Ending the war immediately would allow Hamas to survive and retain military and governing power. Leaving it in the area containing the Sinai-Gaza smuggling routes would ensure that Hamas can rearm. This is why Hamas leaders now plead for a ceasefire. A ceasefire will provide some relief for Gazans today, but a prolonged ceasefire will preserve Hamas’s bloody oppression of Gaza and make future wars with Israel inevitable.

For most Gazans, even when there is no hot war, Hamas’s dictatorship is a nightmarish tyranny. Hamas rule features the torture and murder of regime opponents, official corruption, extremist indoctrination of children, and misery for the population in general. Hamas diverts foreign aid and other resources from proper uses; instead of improving life for the mass of the people, it uses the funds to fight against Palestinians and Israelis.

Moreover, a Hamas-affiliated website warned Gazans last month against cooperating with Israel in securing and delivering the truckloads of aid flowing into the Strip. It promised to deal with those who do with “an iron fist.” In other words, if Hamas remains in power, it will begin torturing, imprisoning, or murdering those it deems collaborators the moment the war ends. Thereafter, Hamas will begin planning its next attack on Israel:

Hamas’s goals are to overshadow the Palestinian Authority, win control of the West Bank, and establish Hamas leadership over the Palestinian revolution. Hamas’s ultimate aim is to spark a regional war to obliterate Israel and, as Hamas leaders steadfastly maintain, fulfill a Quranic vision of killing all Jews.

Hamas planned for corpses of Palestinian babies and mothers to serve as the mainspring of its October 7 war plan. Hamas calculated it could survive a war against a superior Israeli force and energize enemies of Israel around the world. The key to both aims was arranging for grievous Palestinian civilian losses. . . . That element of Hamas’s war plan is working impressively.