Donald Trump’s election victory was a clarifying moment. But in terms of Middle East policy, months on the campaign trail still left three key questions unanswered.

Will Trump recommit the U.S. to a policy of preventing Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon?

American presidents have differed wildly in their Middle East policies over the past 15 years, but they all agreed on the principle that it was too dangerous to allow Iran’s messianic leaders to possess nuclear weapons. Presidents had different strategies to prevent this — from diplomacy (the Iran nuclear deal) to economic sanctions (“maximum pressure”) to military threats (“all options on the table”) — but the principle was constant.

So far, however, the Trump-Vance campaign has not endorsed this approach. In the vice presidential debate, for example, Vance said he supported Israeli action against Iran’s nuclear facilities, but neither he nor Trump have said whether stopping Iran from going nuclear was an American responsibility.

This is a foundational question. The difference between committing the U.S. to preventing Iran from achieving a nuclear weapon or sliding into a de facto policy of containment — doing our best to convince, cajole or coerce Iran not to use its capability — is profound. Virtually everything the Trump administration tries to accomplish in the Middle East will flow from how it answers this question.

Will Trump continue substantial U.S. military deployments in the Middle East that facilitated robust defense........

© The Hill