In an analytical report titled “Can Trump Make the Final Deal with Iran?”, New York Times examines the possible fate of Iran-US relations during Donald Trump’s second term as president.
The report discusses Trump’s progressive strategies towards Iran and lists potential scenarios and possibilities. Contrary to the prevailing pessimistic view, the NYT report does not consider a historic agreement between Iran and the United States to be unlikely. A summary of this analysis is as follows:
🔹On the surface, Trump’s history of withdrawing from the JCPOA, imposing extensive sanctions on Iran, assassinating Qassim Soleimani, as well as forming a strongly anti-Iranian cabinet and being close to Netanyahu promise the beginning of a new round of tough policies against Iran.
🔹However, Trump’s unpredictable approach may lead to a historic reconciliation between Iran and the United States and end decades of hostility.
🔹The reason why Trump prepared an economic war against Iran in his first term as president was the belief that the Islamic Republic was a house of cards and would collapse due to unpopularity. But this did not happen.
🔹There are limits to taking the previous approach. Because there is little left in Iran to sanction: its banks, shipping, oil industry, military, and much more are already under crushing U.S. and international sanctions. But Iran’s leaders have found ways to survive. The idea that more economic pressure will eventually break the Iranian regime has been proven wrong time and again.
Trump’s three choices regarding Iran
🔹This leaves the incoming Trump administration with three choices: ignore Iran, go to war with it, or try diplomacy.
🔹Ignoring Iran has never worked. Iran’s emergence at critical moments has always been costly for American presidents. The hostage crisis and subsequent defeat of Jimmy Carter, the imperilment of the Bush Jr. party’s victory because of the nightmare that Iranian-backed militias in Iraq had created for American forces, and the weakening of the United States’ position in the Middle East, which came about because of China’s mediation in improving relations between Iran and Saudi Arabia.
🔹Although Netanyahu seeks to weaken or even destroy the Islamic Republic, Trump’s isolationist tendencies make him an unwilling partner for a direct military confrontation with Iran. It should also be noted that Trump has somewhat risked his reputation and reputation to end the wars in the Middle East.
🔹This makes diplomacy the best option for Trump. The most tempting course of action for him would be to find a way to end Israel’s war with Hamas, take credit for it, and then pivot to a historic deal with Iran. This would enable Trump to claim that he has brought a comprehensive American peace to the Middle East.
🔹Whether he will succeed is another matter. But if he does, Trump can forever boast that he has achieved something that his predecessor, Joe Biden, never could.
🔹Historically, Trump has enjoyed a showman-like display of power, followed by a sudden and unexpected gesture of compassion. Trump, for example, had previously said that Israel should strike Iran’s nuclear facilities, but later told reporters that he “wasn’t looking to harm Iran.” He added, “I want them to be a very successful country.”
🔹It is far-fetched to imagine Donald Trump hosting a peace summit with Iran in his second term – and even more so that the Islamic Republic would be receptive to such a move. But it is harder to imagine a world in which such a conversation could be avoided any longer. Given Trump’s limited options – and as unthinkable as it may seem – the US-Iran drama is reaching its final conclusion in this new presidency.
