Realism Has Taken Hold in Both Washington and Tehran
The U.S. and Iran remain far apart in their negotiations, but both sides are now taking pragmatic approaches.
The United States and Iran’s visions of what the Middle East should look like once their conflict is resolved could not be further apart. And yet, Washington and Tehran are approaching the talks with conviction and a degree of optimism. Neither side has changed its position. But a dose of realism has taken hold among both parties.
President Donald Trump can rant and threaten all he wants — which, incidentally, is expressly forbidden by the Memorandum of Understanding he signed — but he knows that what the hawks call “finish the job” is not realistic. There is neither support nor funding for such a massive, long-term military commitment in Iran. It would also run counter to Trump’s character, not because he’s “soft,” but because he only thinks and acts in the short term.
Thinking about the Economy
In Iran, traces of the pragmatism repeatedly displayed by the religious leader Ali Khamenei, killed at the beginning of the war, have survived. Chief negotiator Mohammed Bagher Ghalibaf is now openly arguing that Iran must focus on its economy, horrifying the hardliners emboldened by the war who would sacrifice everything for their ideology.
The regime in Tehran has always struck a compromise when the survival of the Islamic Republic was at stake. That doesn’t change its radical character — but it could make a deal with Trump possible.
The United States and Iran’s visions of what the Middle East should look like once their conflict is resolved could not be further apart. And yet, Washington and Tehran are approaching the talks with conviction and a degree of optimism. Neither side has changed its position. But a dose of realism has taken hold among both parties.
President Donald Trump can rant and threaten all he wants — which, incidentally, is expressly forbidden by the Memorandum of Understanding he signed — but he knows that what the hawks call “finish the job” is not realistic. There is neither support nor funding for such a massive, long-term military commitment in Iran. It would also run counter to Trump’s character, not because he’s “soft,” but because he only thinks and acts in the short term.
Thinking about the Economy
In Iran, traces of the pragmatism repeatedly displayed by the religious leader Ali Khamenei, killed at the beginning of the war, have survived. Chief negotiator Mohammed Bagher Ghalibaf is now openly arguing that Iran must focus on its economy, horrifying the hardliners emboldened by the war who would sacrifice everything for their ideology.
The regime in Tehran has always struck a compromise when the survival of the Islamic Republic was at stake. That doesn’t change its radical character — but it could make a deal with Trump possible.
Previous article![]( "The Switzerland Deal: A New President and a Middle East Shrouded in Uncertainty")