The price of President Obama’s nuke deal never stops rising.

Last week, The Washington Post’s Josh Rogin reported that the White House is trying to weaken Rep. Eliot Engel’s bill to slap sanctions on the Syrian government and countries that help it commit mass murder and other war crimes.

Why weaken it? Because that would lead to sanctions on Iran, a key ally of Syrian strongman Bashar al-Assad. And that, the White House warns, might violate the nuke deal. In other words, to save Obama’s signature foreign-policy achievement, Washington must sit by as Tehran helps Assad commit atrocities. Ouch.

The week before, The Wall Street Journal reported that Washington had agreed to lift UN sanctions on two Iranian banks that fund Iran’s missile program. That giveaway turns out to be another secret part of Team Obama’s ransom for four US hostages, on top of $1.7 billion in cash.

But Obama officials also defend lifting the bank sanctions as in the spirit of the nuke deal’s sanctions relief. So add it to the deal’s price tag.

The move raises the risks created by yet another bone Team Obama threw Iran: helping Tehran get around a UN ban on nuclear-capable missiles. (Since the deal was struck, Iran has conducted 10 tests of these missiles; after each, Team Obama expressed “concern.”)

Think about these two gifts to Iran: First, Obama & Co. soften language to let Tehran build nuke-ready missiles. Then they lift sanctions on banks that fund that missile development. (This, on top of the $150 billion the US agreed to ship over as part of the deal.)

What next — send the Iranians the blueprints for our own ICBMs?

And all to save a deal that won’t steer the mullahs one inch from their path to nukes. In the best case, it’ll slow them down — so they won’t have nukes until they’ve finished building the missiles to put them on.

How can anyone (besides Iran) still defend this deal? There’s little upside, and the downside seems to entail signing over a major part of US foreign policy to Iran. In Syria, the White House can’t even agree to sanctions for mass murder and war crimes.

Actually, the Obama administration has refused to do anything about Assad from the day he began his war to hold power. And a prime reason for inaction was the fear that it might disrupt the nuclear talks with Iran.

Washington needs to break free of Iran’s death-grip, even if it risks the collapse of President Obama’s legacy deal. But Hillary Clinton says she’s proud of it — and even tries to take credit for it.

Something else the voters might want to hold her responsible for.