Iran doesn't want the world to believe it's nuclear ambitions are peaceful. The threat of (and actual) progress towards a nuclear weapon is their negotiating po

Iran doesn't want the world to believe it's nuclear ambitions are peaceful. The threat of (and actual) progress towards a nuclear weapon is their negotiating power. Iran doesn't need to build "trust" with the rest of the world. (Almost) everyone agrees that they were followed through on their commitments. What Iran needs is to maintain credability. Without that, the international community would walk all over them. Iran offered to keep following the JCPOA even after the US so blatantly voided it. They just needed the rest of the world to make up the difference. When this didn't happen (again, because the US flexed its muscles to make it not happen) Iran had no way to maintain credability without resuming their nuclear program. In more concrete terms, Iran would still need to negotiate another treaty, only this time they would need to make additional consessions. A few years later, the rest of the worlds backs out of the new treaty and forces Iran to make another set of concessions. > After laying their intentions bare like this, why should anyone trust them with JCPOA 2.0? Because they complied with JCPOA 1.0. And JCPOA 2.0 would likely include monitoring. And we can reimpose sanctions quickly if Iran is found to be in violation. On the other hand, leaders in Iran would need to answer the same questions; only they will be faced with much worse answers. Their counter parties did not follow through on JCPOA 1.0. And rebuilding a nuclear program takes longer than reimposing sanctions. It is easy to get stuck in the mindset that we are the only players. But geopolitics is a game; and our enemies get to make moves too.