Iran-US tensions: There's no room for further miscalculations
As global markets experience a meltdown triggered by US President Donald Trump’s tariffs, the situation in the Middle East remains highly volatile.
Israel continues to strike Lebanon and Gaza - ceasefires notwithstanding - and to expand its presence in Syria, while systematically oppressing and killing Palestinians in the occupied West Bank. At the same time, tensions are rising between the US-Israel axis and Iran.
The situation with Iran is of particular concern, risking further dangerous escalation with global impacts.
The US administration has sent mixed signals on its desire for rapprochement with Iran, indicating on one hand that it is open to reopening nuclear talks, and on the other, continuing a major military buildup in the Middle East - a possible prelude to military strikes on Iranian nuclear and missile facilities.
The latter could be deliberate leverage, in typical Trump fashion, aiming to force Iran to negotiate. Bilateral talks - whether direct or indirect - are set to start this Saturday in Oman.
New MEE newsletter: Jerusalem Dispatch
Sign up to get the latest insights and analysis on Israel-Palestine, alongside Turkey Unpacked and other MEE newsletters
There are also reports that in a letter to Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei last month, Trump issued a two-month deadline for reaching a new nuclear deal.
The letter has not been publicly released, but according to unverified accounts of the text, Trump expressed a desire to move beyond decades of conflict to open “new horizons” in the Iran-US relationship, before warning that should Tehran “reject this outstretched hand” and continue supporting “terrorist” groups in the region, Washington’s response would be “decisive and swift”.
Laudable goal
Even the more modest scholars of Iranian affairs know that proposing a dialogue with Tehran by using threats tends to achieve the opposite of the intended effect. But despite decades of direct and indirect diplomacy with Tehran, US policymakers, regardless of their political affiliations, still struggle to grasp this concept.
Trump’s goal of reopening talks with Iran is certainly laudable, although it ignores the inconvenient truth that had he not reneged in 2018 on the Obama-era nuclear deal, there would be no need for an entirely new set of negotiations - and Iran’s stock of enriched uranium would be a fraction of what it is today. The country is now on the threshold of a nuclear weapons programme.
In the Middle East, Trump has nothing to show but a highly fragile ceasefire in Lebanon and a totally collapsed one in Gaza
News of fresh US-Iran talks was likely not the welcome that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu expected when he met Trump at the White House this week. Their scheduled news conference was swiftly cancelled, with the two leaders instead appearing before a small group of media in the Oval Office.
At the same time, the renewed US interest in making a deal with Iran likely aims to conceal a sort of performance anxiety within the Trump administration. Transatlantic and transpacific relations are under significant stress because of Trump’s tariff policies, while he has failed to achieve peace in Ukraine within 24 hours, as he previously boasted he could do.
In the Middle East, Trump has nothing to show but a highly fragile ceasefire in Lebanon and a totally collapsed one in Gaza.
Ultimately, his presentation of himself as a global peacemaker committed to ending wars has not yet been matched by the realities on the ground. He has further undermined this notion by promising an unprecedented $1 trillion defence budget.
Significant hurdles
Of all the possible deals that Trump would like to achieve, the one with Iran presents some of the most significant hurdles, amid a deep and historical mutual distrust. After Trump’s withdrawal from the nuclear agreement in 2018, the Iranian leadership lost any remaining confidence it had in the US as a potential partner in any kind of deal.
In addition, on a political level, it would be highly costly for the Iranian leadership to cut a deal with the US as Israel continues to pursue its ethnic cleansing strategy in Gaza, alongside strikes on Lebanon and territorial expansion in Syria.
Trump is likely attempting to make a deal with Iran because he sees a good opportunity amid the perceived weakening of the country’s regional network in recent months, after Israel’s decapitation of Hezbollah’s leadership in Lebanon and the collapse of the Assad regime in Syria.
These were certainly heavy blows to Iran’s power configuration in the region, but is the country really so weakened that it will now agree to stop nuclear enrichment, hand over its large supply of enriched uranium, and destroy its existing nuclear facilities, as Trump (and Netanyahu) are asking?
This is the so-called Libya option of 2003, when former leader Muammar Gaddafi gave up on his country’s weapons of mass destruction and nuclear programme. Considering what happened to Libya in the years that followed, this example is not the best incentive for Iranian leaders.
And while Iran’s allies, including Hezbollah in Lebanon and the Houthis in Yemen, have been severely hit, it would be premature - and potentially wrong - to consider them defeated or ineffective.
The situation is evolving with a looming expiry date. The snapback mechanism for UN sanctions could take effect this coming October if the remaining signatories to the nuclear deal - including Russia, China and European states - decide Tehran is not fulfilling its commitments. Such a move would further damage Iran’s shattered economy, potentially giving Trump additional leverage.
Iran has said that if sanctions are reimposed, it would pull out of the Non-Proliferation Treaty, which could spur a US-Israeli attack on Iranian nuclear facilities. It remains to be seen whether China or Russia would allow their strategic partner to be hit.
In other words, the already highly volatile global situation leaves no room for further miscalculations.
The views expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Middle East Eye.
Middle East Eye delivers independent and unrivalled coverage and analysis of the Middle East, North Africa and beyond. To learn more about republishing this content and the associated fees, please fill out this form. More about MEE can be found here.
