It is unclear how Mike Pompeo becoming U.S. secretary of state may affect the Iran nuclear deal, given that there is only one voice that counts in President Donald Trump's administration: his own.
Trump's choice of the Central Intelligence Agency director to replace Rex Tillerson means that the hawk who as a member of Congress fiercely opposed the 2015 pact will now be in charge of the U.S. diplomacy trying to strengthen, and perhaps save, it.
Former U.S. officials and current European officials were at a loss to gauge how the switch would affect negotiations between the United States and three European powers – Britain, France and Germany – that are also parties to the agreement.
Some said Washington may take a harder line under Pompeo and the Europeans may be under more pressure to meet the U.S.'s demands to change or exit the deal, while others suggested his views on the deal have evolved and he may be better placed to influence Trump to keep it.
U.S., British, French and German officials are due to meet on the deal in Berlin on Thursday.
"Any officials negotiating with the Europeans right now will get a much more aggressive set of requirements from Pompeo," said Richard Nephew, a former White House and State Department official who worked on Iran during the Obama administration.
"The odds of them coming up with a thoughtful compromise by May just got a lot longer," he added.
Trump on Tuesday singled out the Iran nuclear deal as one of the main differences he had with Tillerson.
"I think it's terrible, I guess he thinks it was okay," Trump said.
Trump delivered an ultimatum to the European powers on Jan. 12, saying they must agree to "fix the terrible flaws of the Iran nuclear deal" or he would refuse to extend U.S. sanctions relief on Iran for which it calls. U.S. sanctions will resume unless Trump issues fresh "waivers" to suspend them on May 12.
The crux of the July 2015 pact between Iran and world powers was that Iran would restrict its nuclear program in return for relief from sanctions that have crippled its economy.
Trump sees three defects in the deal: its failure to address Iran's ballistic missile program; the terms under which international inspectors can visit suspect Iranian nuclear sites; and "sunset" clauses under which limits on the Iranian nuclear program start to expire after 10 years. He wants all three strengthened if the United States is to stay in the deal.
In a Jan. 13 cable, the State Department sketched out a path under which the three European allies would simply commit to trying to improve the deal over time in return for Trump keeping the pact alive by renewing sanctions relief in May.
Other European officials and former U.S. officials said Pompeo's rise, if he is confirmed as secretary of state by the Senate, might have a more ambiguous effect on the negotiations and that, in any case, Trump's views are paramount.
"All our work is going into delivering a credible package that is sellable to Trump," said a European diplomat on condition of anonymity. "He is what matters here."
While Pompeo was a fierce critic of the deal, called the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, he tempered his views when testifying before Congress in January 2017 to seek confirmation as CIA director.
"Pompeo was a hawk on Iran. However, my understanding is he doesn't want the deal to disappear," said a former senior U.S. official. "People should not jump to conclusions."
Many of Trump's top national security aides, like Tillerson, have argued that the United States is better off with the Iran nuclear deal than without it. That stance was echoed on Tuesday by the U.S. general who heads the U.S. military command responsible for the Middle East and Central Asia.
Former U.S. officials suggested that, as the administration nears a planned summit meeting with North Korean leader Kim Jong Un about Pyongyang's nuclear program, it could rethink its stance on the Iran deal.
European diplomats saw some chance Pompeo may have more influence over Trump than Tillerson, who antagonized the U.S. president by reportedly calling him a "moron" and who differed with Trump on Iran and other issues.
"If Pompeo is that hawkish then in reality, all it is is the affirmation of Trump's policies. It's Trump's line," said another European diplomat. "Hopefully he'll have the mandate that Tillerson didn't have."
Meanwhile, a top U.S. general on Tuesday signaled support for the Iran nuclear deal, saying the agreement has played an important role in addressing Iran's nuclear program.
"The JCPOA addresses one of the principal threats that we deal with from Iran, so if the JCPOA goes away, then we will have to have another way to deal with their nuclear weapons program," said U.S. Army Gen. Joseph Votel.
Votel is head of the U.S. military's Central Command, which is responsible for the Middle East and Central Asia, including Iran. He was speaking to a Senate Armed Services Committee hearing on the same day that Trump fired Tillerson.
"There would be some concern, I think, about how we intended to address that particular threat if it was not being addressed through the JCPOA. Right now, I think it is in our interest" to stay in the deal, Votel said.
When a lawmaker asked whether he agreed with Defense Secretary Jim Mattis and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Joseph Dunford's position on the deal, Votel said: "Yes, I share their position."
Votel also discussed the situation in Syria at the hearing.
More than 1,100 civilians have been killed during the Syrian army's offensive in eastern Ghouta. Syrian President Bashar Assad's forces, backed by Russia and Iran, say they are targeting "terrorist" groups shelling the capital.
Votel said the best way to deter Russia, which backs Assad, was through political and diplomatic channels.
"Certainly if there are other things that are considered, you know, we will do what we are told. … [But] I don't recommend that at this particular point," Votel said, in an apparent to reference to military options.
Republican Senator Lindsey Graham asked whether it was too strong to say that with Russia and Iran's help, Assad had "won" the civil war in Syria.
"I do not think that is too strong of a statement," Votel said.
Graham also asked if the United States' policy on Syria was still to seek the removal of Assad from power.
"I don't know that that's our particular policy at this particular point. Our focus remains on the defeat of Islamic State," Votel said.
