The White House is weighing options as the deadline for a nuclear deal nears.

With a deadline for the Iran nuclear deal just weeks away, the Obama administration is weighing how and when to unwind sanctions on its long-time nemesis.

There are potential pitfalls if it lifts sanctions too fast � or too slow.

Removing sanctions too quickly would give Iran sudden access to cash that some fear it will use to fund nefarious activity. With an accord due by June 30, however, others warn of a different threat: If Iran doesn�t feel relief from sanctions fast enough, it could lose its incentive to stick to the agreement.

�People think that there�s going to be a windfall, a profit for Iran,� said Elizabeth Rosenberg, a former senior adviser on sanctions at the Treasury Department. �The truth is there�s actually a number of reasons why it won�t be fast and it won�t be easy.�

The deal is expected to suspend a slew of nuclear-related international sanctions if Iran severely curbs its atomic program, allowing Tehran to access what�s believed to be more than $100 billion in frozen foreign exchange reserves.

The Obama administration insists sanctions will be rolled back in phases based on Iran meeting certain benchmarks, and that they will be snapped back in place if Iran violates the deal.

But some Iranian officials have indicated they expect many of the main sanctions to be lifted immediately once a deal is reached.

The �great unwinding,� as some call the removal of sanctions, is no simple task.

The U.S. alone has over the past few decades placed numerous sanctions on Iran, some through congressional action and others via the executive branch. In more recent years, amid growing international concern about its nuclear program, Iran also has faced sanctions from several other countries as well as through the United Nations and the European Union.

The combined pressure of the international sanctions program cratered Iran�s economy, spurring severe inflation that climbed above 40 percent in 2013, leading its currency to plummet in value � and ultimately helping bring the Islamist-led country to the negotiating table.

Under the deal, sanctions that target Iran�s sponsorship of terrorism, its ballistic missile program and its human rights abuses are expected to stay in place, while those related to its nuclear program will be waived. Sanctions that have targeted Iran for multiple reasons, including its nuclear initiatives, may be more challenging to pick apart.

Iran already is courting international businesses, and many have expressed interest in investing in the Islamic republic, or, in some cases, returning there. The country has a well-educated population of 81 million � about the same as Germany. Its vast oil and gas reserves make it a prize for energy firms, but the technology, automobile and construction industries, among others, also hold appeal.

Still, the long-term prognosis for the nuclear deal is uncertain. If a Republican wins the White House in 2016, the U.S.

commitment to the deal could flag. Corruption also is rampant in Iran, where the state controls much of the economy.

For those reasons and more, most U.S. firms will likely continue to avoid the Middle Eastern nation altogether, analysts said, while businesses based elsewhere will tread cautiously, knowing they risk their relationship with the United States (and massive fines) if they run afoul of what will still remain a complex sanctions architecture.

The reluctance could stunt a hoped-for economic rebound in Iran. �What that may do is cause frustration in Iran, which will then undermine the deal and reduce their incentive to adhere to the deal,� Rosenberg said.

A slow recovery also could strengthen Tehran hardliners dead set against compromising the country�s nuclear program � which Iran has always insisted is peaceful � and disillusion an Iranian public constantly bombarded with anti-U.S. propaganda.

Although Iran has received some relief from sanctions under an interim deal struck to keep it at the negotiating table, Iranians expect significantly more of an economic boost once a formal accord is reached.

�Should the U.S. provide sanctions relief that does not provide practical value for Iran and its economy (e.g., if foreign banks still refuse to conduct transactions in or related to Iran out of persistent fear over U.S. anti-money laundering laws), then Iran�s incentive to stick with its obligations under a deal are diminished,� Tyler Cullis, a legal fellow with the National Iranian American Council, which backs the nuclear talks, wrote in an email.

Even if all goes well with the nuclear deal�s implementation, it will be several years before Iran�s economy resembles something relatively normal, said Andreas Schweitzer, senior managing partner at Arjan Capital, an investment and advisory firm with a focus on Iran.

�Probably the Iranians might be a bit disappointed if things do not go as far as fast as they hope,� he said.

The White House declined to comment on its pathway to unwind the sanctions, but in remarks delivered at the annual Jerusalem Post conference in New York earlier this month, Treasury Secretary Jack Lew stressed that �the idea that Iran�s economy will instantly recover if a deal is reached is a myth.�

�Iran�s domestic investment needs are estimated to be at least half a trillion dollars, which far exceeds the benefit of sanctions relief,� said Lew, who spoke at length on the phased in nature of the sanctions roll-back.

Critics of the Iran talks, as well as some supporters, dismiss the idea that a slow Iranian economic recovery is itself a significant threat to a nuclear deal, and it is not an argument likely to raise concern in Congress, where lawmakers are deeply suspicious of negotiating with Tehran.

While there is worry that Iran could use a cash influx to covertly resume its nuclear activities, critics also fear Iran will use its renewed access to billions in frozen assets to further interfere in neighboring countries, including Iraq and Syria. U.S. officials have countered that Iran�s regional mischief is already low-cost and low-tech and that it is far more likely to invest the money in its battered economy.

Even if relief from sanctions takes longer than Iranians wish, �there will be enough relief in enough time that it will correct itself,� said Richard Nephew, a former State Department official who served as lead sanctions expert for the U.S. team negotiating with Iran.

He argued that if the U.S. and its international partners stick to their pledges to include a strong �snap-back� mechanism to reimpose sanctions if Iran violates the nuclear deal, one benefit of that is an Iran that is more willing to give the sanctions relief a realistic amount of time to take effect.

Critics of the deal, however, suspect that reimposing sanctions will be much harder than President Barack Obama and his international allies are promising. They also argue that even if Iran gets an immediate and sustained economic boost from sanctions relief, the government there will probably complain it is not enough anyway as a ruse to renege on the deal.

The Obama administration has not been transparent enough with Congress or the public about how it will lift sanctions or how it would snap them back on, said Mark Dubowitz, executive director of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies and one of the most vocal skeptics of the nuclear talks.

He predicted that the proposed sanctions relief plan could �spark outside efforts to persuade international banks and companies not to go back into Iran as well as lawyers representing victims of Iranian terrorism to do everything possible to collection on the billions of dollars in outstanding judgments.�

Under a law reluctantly signed by Obama, Congress will ultimately get to weigh in on whether he can waive sanctions, and even in these final weeks, some lawmakers are looking for ways to signal a tough stance toward Iran regardless of whether an agreement is reached.

Sens. Robert Menendez (D-N.J.) and Mark Kirk (R-Ill.) recently proposed legislation that would extend by 10 years a 1996 Iran sanctions law that includes nuclear-related provisions and which was supposed to expire next year.

The president could in theory waive those sanctions under a nuclear deal, but some supporters of the Iran talks blasted Menendez and Kirk for proposing the amendment at such a delicate time, saying it could undermine the negotiations.

This article was written by Nahal Toosi for Politico on June 15, 2015. Nahal Toosi is a foreign affairs correspondent at POLITICO. She joined POLITICO from The Associated Press, where she reported from and/or served as an editor in New York, Islamabad, Kabul and London.