News ID : 210026
Publish Date : 1/24/2025 7:19:09 PM
Trump's new approach to Iran: Seeking a deal or political game?

Trump's new approach to Iran: Seeking a deal or political game?

NOURNEWS – Donald Trump, upon returning to the White House, has placed Iran at the center of his foreign policy agenda. He offers diplomacy on one hand and creates psychological pressure through threats of an Israeli military strike on the other. But will these policies lead to a sustainable agreement or push the region towards further tension?

In his first official statement on Iran since returning to the White House, Trump reiterated that Iran must not acquire nuclear weapons. He also expressed his desire for a diplomatic agreement with Iran, stating that if a deal is reached, there are ways to ensure that Iran does not obtain nuclear weapons. While emphasizing the importance of diplomacy, Trump also hinted at the threat of an Israeli military strike on Iran's nuclear facilities, but refrained from making a definitive statement about supporting or opposing it.

Duality of diplomacy and threats

An initial assessment of Donald Trump's statements suggests that he is attempting to pursue a balanced policy of pressure and engagement towards Iran. While he refers to diplomacy as the primary path, he has also raised the threat of an Israeli military strike as a means of exerting pressure on Iran. However, these threats are more psychological and propagandistic than operational. Practical experiences, such as "Operation True Promise 1 and 2," in which Iran inflicted significant damage on Israel's critical infrastructure, demonstrate that Iran's response to any military action could be catastrophic for Israel. Moreover, high-ranking Iranian officials have declared that Operation True Promise 3 against Israel is inevitable, meaning that any action by Tel Aviv against Iran could trigger this operation. Therefore, these threats are primarily perceived as tools of psychological warfare.

 

Challenges of reaching an agreement

Trump has claimed that he was just a week away from reaching an agreement with Iran at the end of his first term. However, the reality is that achieving a comprehensive agreement will face significant challenges. While Trump has stated his desire to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons, he also seeks, as he has previously stated, a complete halt to Iran's enrichment cycle, a demand that Tehran considers contrary to its international rights and the framework of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT). Iranian officials have repeatedly emphasized that the country's nuclear program is entirely peaceful and that the production of nuclear weapons is prohibited by the fatwa of the Islamic Revolution Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khameni.

 

Appointment of a special envoy and implicit messages

By appointing Steve Witkoff, the US Special Representative for the Middle East, as the lead on the Iran file, Trump has sent a clear signal of his determination to pursue diplomacy. At the same time, implicit messages such as the removal of protection for John Bolton, Mike Pompeo, and Brian Hook, and criticism of their hostile policies, indicate Trump's attempt to distance himself from the military option. These actions demonstrate his seriousness in reducing tensions on the one hand and his desire to secure a historic agreement in his name on the other.

 

Maximum pressure or diplomacy with Trump's criteria?

Trump seeks an agreement beyond the JCPOA that can bring him greater achievements than previous US administrations. In this pursuit, he is likely to employ a combination of economic pressure and diplomatic threats. His statements yesterday, if followed through, indicate that he prefers to use diplomacy as the initial tool to reach an agreement. Trump might even consider establishing a confidential channel during direct negotiations to achieve his goals.

 

Confrontation or agreement?

Trump's policy towards Iran is still based on the duality of pressure and engagement. On the one hand, he attempts to pressure Iran through psychological and economic means, while on the other, he presents diplomacy as a path to reduce tensions. Iran's response to these policies will play a crucial role in determining the future of interactions. Due to America's history of reneging on its commitments and failing to adhere to previous agreements, Iran will undoubtedly approach new US initiatives with a lack of trust. Iran cannot engage in fresh interactions without receiving binding guarantees. In this context, Tehran's consistent emphasis on welcoming processes that guarantee the lifting of sanctions, reducing tensions, and preserving Iran's international rights can create a new path to break the current impasse in relations with the West.

Establishing a common understanding and building minimal trust regarding the resolution of the ongoing crisis in Iran-West relations is a necessary prelude to opening any new path for constructive engagement.

 

 


NOURNEWS
Comments

first name & last name

email

comment