These remarks raise two key questions: first, why does Iran hold such importance for the US government? And second, what exactly is this “something bad” that Trump is referring to?
Why is Iran Issue at the Top of Trump’s Priorities?
Trump has cited Iran’s peaceful nuclear program as the primary reason for Washington’s focus on Tehran, but this is only part of the equation. Iran’s geostrategic position, significant military power, its role in global energy dynamics, and its location along key north–south and east–west corridors have all turned Tehran into a pivotal player on both the regional and international stages.
In addition, the United States has, in recent years, placed a special emphasis on policies aimed at containing China in East Asia. However, to advance this strategy, Washington must first manage and de-escalate existing crises in West Asia. Issues such as Lebanon, Gaza, Syria, Yemen, and American relations with Iraq are all strategic priorities for the White House. In every one of these scenarios, Iran’s role as a powerful and influential actor is undeniable. Consequently, in order to reclaim its former hegemony in the region and to create conditions favorable for focusing on restraining China, the United States is compelled to adopt specific policies toward Iran. This is why Iran has been placed at the top of Donald Trump’s foreign policy agenda.
Iran’s Stance on the Request for Negotiations
A few days ago, Iran’s Foreign Minister announced that Iran’s response to Trump’s letter had been sent through Oman, emphasizing that Tehran will not enter into negotiations under any pressure. However, if necessary, indirect talks—similar to those in the past—could continue. Additionally, Ali Shamkhani, the political advisor to the Supreme Leader and the official in charge of Iran’s nuclear dossier, stressed that Iran’s response to Trump’s letter was “measured.” He affirmed that Iran is fully prepared to confront any threat.
Why Is the Path to Negotiation Not Smooth?
By entering the nuclear negotiations and signing the JCPOA (Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action) in 2015, Iran demonstrated its goodwill in settling differences. However, the United States’ unilateral withdrawal from the deal and Europe’s inaction regarding its commitments have led Iran to lose trust in the possibility of any lasting agreement. Currently, Iran’s nuclear program is under the supervision of the International Atomic Energy Agency, and despite political maneuvering, there has been no sign of deviation.
Under these circumstances, returning to the negotiating table without building trust and easing the imposed pressures is unlikely. The unpredictable policies of the US government and its attempts to maximize pressure on Iran have made the path to dialogue even more challenging.
“Something Bad”: Military Option or Increased Pressure?
In his recent remarks, Trump did not specify what he meant by “something bad,” but American officials have previously outlined two options: negotiation or war. Both the Defense Secretary and the National Security Advisor have stated that Trump has demanded that Iran halt its nuclear program, and if it does not, the United States will consider various options—a request to which Iran’s negative response is already anticipated.
Iran’s Stance Toward Military Threats
Iran, as a powerful nation with significant popular support—a fact demonstrated by the recent Quds Day march—has shown that it is extremely sensitive when it comes to protecting its national interests and security. This sensitivity is apparent in its response to external threats. Iran has proven that, when faced with any threat, it will employ all its available capacities in defense.
Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf , head of parliament and a member of the Supreme National Security Council, stated yesterday during Quds Day, outlining Iran’s official stance on military threats, “In the event of any violation of Iran’s territory, the entire region will ignite, and American and allied bases will not remain safe.” This declaration indicates that Iran does not consider a “limited response” as an option, viewing any US military action as the trigger for a widespread regional war.
Analysts believe that, given its far-reaching consequences, a military option would be extremely costly for Washington. With its defensive capabilities and regional influence, Iran has demonstrated that it will not leave external threats unanswered.
Role of Israel in Escalating Tensions
One of the major factors exacerbating tensions in the region is Israel’s role. The Israeli regime has consistently sought to divert attention from its own internal crises by stirring up conflicts and portraying Iran as the greatest threat. Consequently, American pressures on Iran align with Israel’s strategic interests. If Trump chooses to remain aligned with Israel’s policies toward Iran, regional conflicts are likely to intensify, and the stability of the Middle East will become even more precarious.
Two Paths Ahead for Trump
In facing the Iran issue, Trump has two possible courses of action: the first involves acknowledging the regional realities, respecting Iran’s legitimate interests and rights, and working to de-escalate tensions through genuine diplomacy; the second entails persisting with policies of pressure and threats, which could provoke even broader crises.
So far, Iran has demonstrated that it is not seeking to provoke tensions, but if the second path is chosen, there is a significant likelihood that conflicts and unrest in the region will escalate. It remains to be seen whether Trump—whose many foreign policy endeavors have so far achieved little success—will be able to resolve the issue he claims to prioritize without sparking a new crisis.
NOURNEWS