During World War II, the British ambassador to Turkey’s butler spied on the Allies by accessing the ambassador’s files and obtaining top-secret information, such as their plans for D-Day. Fortunately, the Germans deemed him unreliable and ignored the information. This seemingly isolated incident had unforeseen consequences that unfolded into a series of events.
The brutal actions of Iran’s proxy, Hamas, on Oct. 7, 2023, extended beyond the atrocities in Israel. As Israel dismantled Hamas, it also weakened Hezbollah, resulting in the closure of Lebanon’s border with Syria. With Hezbollah destabilized, an opportunity arose in Syria, leading to the downfall of the Assad regime within 10 days.
The rebels now control Syria, diminishing Iran’s network of regional proxies. This sequence of events, like falling dominoes, severely undermined Iran’s ambitions of influence in the region. Iran faces a critical decision: engage in realistic negotiations with the West or pursue nuclear power recklessly.
The United Nations Chief Nuclear Inspector raised concerns about Iran’s nuclear activities, while Iran’s former nuclear negotiator called for discussions on the nuclear program. Iran’s new president aims to engage with the West positively. Iran’s options through its weakened regional alliances are limited. Will it opt for diplomacy or confrontational tactics against an emboldened Netanyahu and Trump?
Iran previously pursued a more moderate foreign policy under Ali Rafsanjani’s presidency, which could be revisited with the current leadership. The choice before Iran is crucial. Will it choose wisely, and will the US administration under Trump be receptive to diplomatic overtures from Iran?
Senator Marco Rubio has expressed concerns about Iran and may advocate for a complete withdrawal from its nuclear program. Hopefully, a balanced approach prevails in the US administration, considering Iran’s desire for respect and influence in the international arena, particularly through its nuclear program.
There is hope that Iran will adopt a more sensible approach in its interactions with the West, potentially maintaining its nuclear program while seeking diplomatic solutions.
Experts in the Middle East now point to China, rather than Iran, as the primary threat to the United States. The push for democracy in Iran following the controversial 2009 presidential election was met with widespread mobilization. While historical precedent is not always a direct indicator of national interests, it is important to acknowledge the role of the United States and Britain in thwarting Iranian democratic efforts in the past through a coordinated CIA/MI6 coup.
In the absence of President Bashar al-Assad, Iran’s pursuit of a potentially counterproductive political agenda centered around nuclear capabilities seems unwarranted. Given Israel’s significant military strength, both conventional and nuclear, and with the impending presidency of Donald Trump, a realpolitik approach appears to be the most viable option for Iran. This strategy emphasizes realistic expectations and transparency, particularly concerning Iran’s nuclear ambitions.
The possibility of Iran developing nuclear capabilities is a cause of concern for Israel, which may take unilateral action to eliminate Iran’s nuclear facilities if it perceives a threat, regardless of U.S. support. Iran is cognizant of Israel’s apprehensions and capabilities, underscoring the importance of adopting a more pragmatic political solution.
Positive diplomatic gestures from the incoming Trump administration could pave the way for constructive bilateral relations between Iran and the West. Certain conditions must be met for Iran and the U.S. to reach a sustainable nuclear agreement, ensuring that both parties can claim credit for the success. This involves reopening direct negotiations with Iran, led by Pezeshkian, under the framework of the Non-Proliferation Treaty, including robust verification of Iran’s nuclear program. In return, Iran should receive sanctions relief as compensation.
An essential step following this agreement would be the establishment of a nuclear-free zone in the Persian Gulf region by neighboring countries, fostering collective security. Further negotiations should aim to create a comprehensive treaty among regional nations, outlining an integrated mechanism for mutual security and collaborative cooperation.
The Trump administration faces a critical juncture with vast opportunities and risks. Emphasizing national interest over personal agendas, the administration must pursue a foreign policy conducive to American strategic leadership. This entails judicious use of economic and political influence, with military intervention remaining an option but not the default choice.
F. Andrew Wolf Jr., director of The Fulcrum Institute, a collective of scholars in the humanities, arts, and sciences, highlights the potential for significant progress in U.S.-Iran relations. As we navigate these complex geopolitical waters, prioritizing long-term American interests is imperative.
