Iran Considers Potential Deal with Trump: Prospects and Challenges for U.S.-Iran Relations
New Vision for Iran and the U.S.
The new government in Iran, whose president, Masoud Pezeshkian, is relatively moderate, views the U.S. election as a chance to start anew in its relationship with the United States following Donald Trump re-election as president.
Although Trump earlier actions-the pull-out from the 2015 nuclear deal, the imposition of sanctions have done immense damage to ties, many in Iran’s establishment have increasingly come to believe that a nuclear deal with Trump would finally open up long-term prospects for the country.
The article narrates Iran’s current political posture, the enormous problems related to previous confrontations, and new avenues that could eventually pave the way for a new approach in diplomacy.
Background on Trump’s Stand on Iran
Trump advanced his hardline posture towards Iran, pulling the U.S. out of the 2015 nuclear deal negotiated under the Obama administration.
The result was the reimposition of strict economic sanctions that badly battered the economy with wide-scale inflation, unemployment, and currency devaluation.
His military posture was also confrontational: he authorized the targeted killing of Iranian General Qassem Soleimani, putting the tensions between the U.S. and Iran at all-time high.
Still, there are those in Iran who think that this is exactly the moment Trump wants, with his drive for achievements, which shall be qualified as his diplomatic success, to seal “properly deals that safeguard separate diplomatic successes” in case his strategy results in durable solutions.
Change of Iranian Leadership and Political Landscape
With the election of Masoud Pezeshkian, Iran entered a new phase marked by a more moderate and pragmatic leadership.
Pezeshkian government seems to be open to revisiting Iran’s approach to foreign policy with a willingness to make realistic, multifaceted contacts.
Many believe within Pezeshkian administration this new climate may indeed be conducive to breakthroughs in diplomacy, especially if Iran approaches negotiations flexibly and realistically, insiders say.
While the slogan “Neither war nor surrender” is repeated, the leading reformist newspaper Shargh reflected the tone of urging the new government “to avoid past mistakes and assume a pragmatic and multidimensional policy.”
In this sense, the pragmatism call is an indication of shifting away from Iran’s defensive position in history and an indication that the government is ready for engagement with the United States.
3.Arguments for Engaging with Trump
Some in Pezeshkian administration think that Trump’s power within the Republican camp can be stabilizing for an agreement arrived at.
They opine that even Trump’s interest in negotiations-they call it a transactional relationship-can be useful in forging an enduring agreement.
Taking into account Trump’s capacity to recast U.S. foreign policy to his goals and renegotiate deals successfully, Iranian officials feel he might be ready to bargain over an essential new framework that would be helpful to both countries.
In addition, an agreement reached with Trump might hold much more political weight in the U.S. context, especially considering Trump’s influence over the Republican Party, which would shield any potential deal from being easily dismantled by future administrations.
One is hoping that Trump’s reputation as a “deal-maker” could coincide with Pezeshkian aspiration to restore Iran’s economy and diminish international isolation.
Obstacles and Obstacles When Dealing with the United States
Although Iranian leaders may believe that opening a line of communication with Trump may prove to be an added source of value, there are obvious risks and challenges involved.
The long, turbulent history of Iran’s relationship with the United States brought decades of mistrust and unrelated incidents that, in turn, fostered mutual suspicion.
Exits from the nuclear deal and re imposed sanctions put many people in Iran in a rather apathetic mood about the intentions of this administration.
The new accord, for sure, will be fragile and reversible for Trump in case his strategic interests call for that.
Tensions between the two nations remain at high levels, after the latest scandal, i.e. an alleged Iran plot to kill Trump, which was uncovered just before he secured his re-election.
Such situation has made mutual distrust prevalent and would hinder to create mutual goodwill for starting the negotiation process.
Domestic Debate in Iran
There are different views on engagement with the U.S. within Iran. The hardliners within Iran believe that Iran cannot trust the U.S. or Trump since he has a history of hostile policies.
They would not want another round of negotiations that brings them into compromise on losing some of the sovereign-possessed powers or military prowess.
Moderates and reformists have argued that Iran has little to lose from reengagement, especially because the country is now facing an economic downturn.
They argue that trading with Trump may ease the economic squeeze, which would benefit the greater majority.
A split in Iranian media can even be seen in the moderate press’s movement toward a diplomatic approach based on pragmatism and compromise.
Possible Terms of a New Agreement
If Iran had to bargain with Trump, the new terms of any agreement would likely revolve around a few core features:
Nuclear Program: Commitment not to be involved in nuclear activities other than for civilian purposes, along with tight control by foreign bodies.
Economic Sanctions: Iran would probably demand an immediate lifting of the sanctions in exchange for capping its nuclear activities so that it could start to rebuild its economy and participate in international markets.
Regional Influence: The U.S. might ask Iran to scale down its interference in the various conflicts across the Middle East, especially in Syria, Yemen, and Lebanon.
Security Assurances: Iran could demand that the U.S. provide guarantees it won’t pursue further the attack represented by the Soleimani assassination and all the heavy military forces in the region.
An agreement on these issues seems impossible because Iran will not give up its regional power, and for Trump demonstrating a strong position of the U.S. in any agreement will be an important issue.
Consequences for the U.S. Relations with Iran and for the Region
A deal with the new president, Trump, would have important implications for the Middle East and for global politics at large.
Good US-Iran relations could stabilize troubled areas of conflict by giving way to reducing proxy wars and a shift in regional dynamics.
In this way, it would also improve Iran’s relations with former allies, such as those in Europe, who had welcomed the 2015 nuclear deal and may have appreciated a diplomatic resolution.
But if the negotiations fail, the outcome could be a new vicious circle of sanctions and the threat of military conflict-the nightmare scenario both for Iran and the United States.
Conclusion: A Tipping Point for Iran and U.S. Diplomacy
It is the defining moment for Iran’s newly elected government under President Pezeshkian. Both countries hold high stakes as they weigh their options for a new diplomatic initiative.
While these benefits in engaging with Trump might be attractive for some in Iran, risks of continued antagonism outweigh them.
The new contract may help rebuild Iran’s economy and ease tensions in the Middle East; meanwhile, it will throw open the road for even more constructive U.S.-Iran relations in the future.
Whether Iran is really ready to tread this pragmatic path and whether Trump is willing to seize an opportunity for a transformative deal that can change the trajectory of U.S.-Iran relations will be revealed in coming months.
