President Trump is pursuing a new negotiated deal with Iran to limit its ballistic missile program and end support for regional proxies, rather than opting for military strikes. Experts suggest that Iran’s weakened position may lead it to engage in talks. However, the potential clash of Trump’s negotiation style with Iran’s diplomatic acumen raises skepticism about the success of these efforts amidst military threats.
U.S. President Donald Trump is pursuing a new deal with Iran aimed at restricting its ballistic missile activities and terminating support for regional proxies, rather than opting for direct military strikes. This approach diverges from his previous policy of “maximum pressure,” which included sanctions and air strikes. Recently, Iran rejected a letter from Mr. Trump inviting dialogue, labeling it as deceptive. Nevertheless, emerging regional dynamics may lead Tehran to reconsider negotiations.
Political scientist Professor Mohsen Milani highlights that Trump’s renewed engagement comes as Washington perceives Iran’s position as weakened, with some officials advocating for a final resolution regarding Iran’s influence. The prevailing belief is that Iran has become vulnerable, prompting thoughts of potential regime change or military actions against its nuclear facilities and military assets. Prof. Milani emphasizes that if Iran concedes to these demands, it would essentially signify its capitulation.
Trump’s demands echo his previous administration’s stance following the withdrawal from the 2015 nuclear agreement initiated by former President Barack Obama. That agreement was intended to temporarily restrain Iran’s nuclear program in exchange for sanctions relief, but critics argue it inadvertently empowered Tehran’s regional maneuvers. Moreover, changes have unfolded since Trump’s departure, altering Iran’s influence considerably within the Middle East.
Despite some diplomatic advances Iran has made with its Gulf neighbors that might enhance its bargaining power with the U.S., experts warn that Trump’s negotiation style may clash with Iran’s adept diplomatic maneuvers. Former British diplomat John Sawers expresses skepticism about the efficacy of these negotiations under Trump’s unwavering approach. However, a consensus could emerge concerning U.S. interests in stabilizing oil prices through the possible reintegration of Iranian oil into the global market.
The looming threat of military action by Trump complicates Iran’s situation further. Iran faces a pivotal decision: negotiate for sanctions relief while continuing its nuclear agenda or risk provoking a military response. Prof. Milani cautions that if Iran pursues both avenues simultaneously, it might trigger military interventions should its nuclear aspirations become evident, underscoring the perilous nature of Iran’s potential actions in this complex geopolitical landscape.
In summary, President Trump seeks a new Iran deal focused on curbing Iran’s missile capabilities and support for proxies, marking a departure from his previous approach of maximum pressure. Despite rejecting overtures for dialogue, regional developments could motivate Iran to engage. Nevertheless, the dynamics of U.S.-Iran relations are fraught with complexity, as Trump’s blunt negotiation style may hinder progress, compounded by the threat of military action complicating Iran’s choices. The potential for a peaceful resolution remains uncertain, particularly if Iran attempts to maneuver both diplomatic and nuclear pathways simultaneously.
Original Source: www.thenationalnews.com
