Follow us on social

google cta
Benjamin Netanyahu Donald Trump

Why Trump can do what Biden couldn't on Iran

Nuclear talks will begin this weekend and the president is apparently willing to deal

Analysis | QiOSK
google cta
google cta

Recent news that high level Trump administration officials — including special envoy Steve Witkoff — will meet either indirectly or directly with their Iranian counterparts, including Iran’s foreign minister, this coming weekend in Oman is quite remarkable, particularly given that the Biden administration never managed to get this far in four years.

Many in Washington will conclude that Trump succeeded in getting these negotiations to rein in Iran’s nuclear program started because he orchestrated a credible military threat against Iran. Indeed, that is a factor.

But a far more important factor is the other side of the equation: Tehran appears to believe that Trump really wants a deal and that he's willing and capable to offer serious sanctions relief to get it.

That upside never existed with Biden. Lifting sanctions on Iran was just too painful for the former president. And even the limited sanctions relief Biden was willing to offer, he could not make sustainable.

In that sense, Trump is very different. He doesn't treat diplomacy with America's detractors as a costly endeavor, nor is he a fan of sanctions that punish American companies.

So the promise for Iran is far greater with Trump than it was with Biden. And Tehran is apparently willing to offer concessions to secure that upside. Which is the main (but not the only) reason as to why things are moving so fast now.

As far as the substance of the talks goes, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was in Washington this week pushing for the so-called “Libya model” — or a complete dismantlement of Iran’s nuclear program.

But if Trump seeks to dismantle the Iranian nuclear program Libya-style, in addition to closing down Iran's missile program and Tehran's relations with its regional partners, then diplomacy will most likely be dead on arrival.

This strategy has been favored by proponents of war with Iran precisely because they know it will fail.

If Trump's strategy is centered on achieving a verification-based deal that prevents an Iranian bomb — his only red line — then there is reason to be optimistic about upcoming talks.

But beyond the substance of Netanyahu’s proposal, Trump would be foolish to take his advice on Iran diplomacy, given the fact that this accused war criminal has — for more than 20 years now — sought to prevent and sabotage talks in order to trap the U.S. into a forever war with Iran.

Instead, Trump should listen to those — including many of his own prominent supporters like conservative media personality Tucker Carlson — who know that a U.S.-Iran war would have destructive consequences for America. Following Netanyahu and others who share his views down the path to war with Iran is a great way to ensure that U.S. foreign policy puts Americans' best interests last.


Top image credit: White House
google cta
Analysis | QiOSK
G7 Summit
Top photo credit: May 21, 2023, Hiroshima, Hiroshima, Japan: (From R to L) Comoros' President Azali Assoumani, World Trade Organization (WTO) Director-General Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala, Australia's Prime Minister Anthony Albanese and India's Prime Minister Narendra Modi at the G7 summit in Hiroshima, Japan. (Credit Image: © POOL via ZUMA Press Wire)

Middle Powers are setting the table so they won't be 'on the menu'

Asia-Pacific

The global order was already fragmenting before Donald Trump returned to the White House. But the upended “rules” of global economic and foreign policies have now reached a point of no return.

What has changed is not direction, but speed. Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney’s remarks in Davos last month — “Middle powers must act together, because if we’re not at the table, we’re on the menu” — captured the consequences of not acting quickly. And Carney is not alone in those fears.

keep readingShow less
Vice President JD Vance Azerbaijan Armenia
U.S. Vice President JD Vance gets out of a car before boarding Air Force Two upon departure for Azerbaijan, at Zvartnots International Airport in Yerevan, Armenia, February 10, 2026. REUTERS/Kevin Lamarque/Pool

VP Vance’s timely TRIPP to the South Caucasus

Washington Politics

Vice President JD Vance’s regional tour to Armenia and Azerbaijan this week — the highest level visit by an American official to the South Caucasus since Vice President Joe Biden went to Georgia in 2009 — demonstrates that Washington is not ignoring Yerevan and Baku and is taking an active role in their normalization process.

Vance’s stop in Armenia included an announcement that Yerevan has procured $11 million in U.S. defense systems — a first — in particular Shield AI’s V-BAT, an ISR unmanned aircraft system. It was also announced that the second stage of a groundbreaking AI supercomputer project led by Firebird, a U.S.-based AI cloud and infrastructure company, would commence after having secured American licensing for the sale and delivery of an additional 41,000 NVIDIA GB300 graphics processing units.

keep readingShow less
United Nations
Monitors at the United Nations General Assembly hall display the results of a vote on a resolution condemning the annexation of parts of Ukraine by Russia, amid Russia's invasion of Ukraine, at the United Nations Headquarters in New York City, New York, U.S., October 12, 2022. REUTERS/David 'Dee' Delgado||

We're burying the rules based order. But what's next?

Global Crises

In a Davos speech widely praised for its intellectual rigor and willingness to confront established truths, Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney finally laid the fiction of the “rules-based international order” to rest.

The “rules-based order” — or RBIO — was never a neutral description of the post-World War II system of international law and multilateral institutions. Rather, it was a discourse born out of insecurity over the West’s decline and unwillingness to share power. Aimed at preserving the power structures of the past by shaping the norms and standards of the future, the RBIO was invariably something that needed to be “defended” against those who were accused of opposing it, rather than an inclusive system that governed relations between all states.

keep readingShow less
google cta
Want more of our stories on Google?
Click here to make us a Preferred Source.

LATEST

QIOSK

Newsletter

Subscribe now to our weekly round-up and don't miss a beat with your favorite RS contributors and reporters, as well as staff analysis, opinion, and news promoting a positive, non-partisan vision of U.S. foreign policy.