Iran won’t cave in ...
Page 1
It appears there is a degree of national consensus in Iran on the need to negotiate with the United States, but this current alignment cannot be directly compared to the consensus that once formed around the JCPOA. Even that earlier consensus, despite being broadly supported, did not pan out in the end, largely because the agreement was thrown out the window when the US administration changed hands.
Still, the new talks are being welcomed as an auspicious development. Representatives from both sides are being sent to Oman, and negotiations are about to get underway. From the looks of it, the Americans seem eager to push for quick results, while Iran appears in no rush to seal a deal hastily.
President Trump’s personality suggests he is someone who thrives on making big moves and wants to make headlines as the first US president in decades to clinch a major deal with Iran, especially because such an achievement could play well for him in America’s domestic political arena.
In this short time during his second term, Trump has already set himself apart from previous presidents by adopting different methods, not just in handling Iran but in dealing with Europe and other global players as well.
He has laid out a list of international priorities, and Iran certainly figures prominently among them. Naturally, he would want to start with the easier items. But US–Iran relations are no walk in the park. Beyond the nuclear dossier, which has been on the table for years, there are deeper layers involving Israel and other sensitive issues that make any negotiations incredibly thorny.
President Trump, in this brief second-term stint, has already dabbled in multiple international crises. Take Ukraine, for instance—things have not moved along at the speed he expected. He waded into the Gaza conflict with heavy-handed threats, yet he has not managed to resolve it swiftly. He has also taken aim at China, primarily driven by economic interests, but tackling that challenge is anything but straightforward. At the same time, he is also juggling issues involving Denmark, Greenland, Mexico, Canada, and others—each of which will inevitably spill over into the rest of his foreign policy agenda. So, at this stage, it is anyone’s guess whether he will hit the mark on any of these fronts.
Regarding Iran–US talks, both sides are coming to the table with their own expectations and red lines. But to strike a win-win deal, both parties must have their demands taken into account, and the eventual outcome should leave them both satisfied.
If the US, emboldened by its power or bullying tactics, attempts to strong-arm Iran into accepting unreasonable terms while ignoring Iran’s legitimate concerns, then naturally Iran will not bow to pressure. Such a deal would be unacceptable not just to Iran but to any sovereign state. Even a small country like Denmark refused to give in to US demands regarding Greenland.
A model agreement like the JCPOA could still serve as a viable blueprint for the upcoming talks, as it was built on a give-and-take framework—a true win-win arrangement. President Trump, however, did not see it that way. He believed Iran had pulled a fast one on Obama through the JCPOA, which is why he tore it up unilaterally.
Now, with new negotiations on the horizon, it remains to be seen what kind of calculations each side will bring to the table and what specific demands they will put forward. The US currently has nuclear-related concerns. In addition, issues surrounding Israel and Iran’s support for regional resistance movements may also crop up in these discussions.
That said, Trump is hardly in a position to make demands on Iran’s defense capabilities—this is a matter of national security. No country would ever willingly disarm itself in the face of potential threats or hostilities. Such expectations are not only unrealistic for a major power like Iran but would also be rejected outright by international organizations and sovereign states around the world.