The apparent retreat of America after consecutive threats… !!!!

, International Group: “ Najah Mohammed Ali Iraqi political analyst and activist, a dedicated note entitled” Obvious US Substitution after successive threats “to the International Group

Sudden change in the tone of Trump’s Special Representative in the Middle East has surprised many. Speaking for a long time before “the need for maximum pressure” against Iran, he is now talking about “trusting” and “abolition of misunderstandings”. The obvious contradiction in the Trump administration’s policies has revealed this time in Iran’s case. A policy that began with the threat to the war, but has now come to an attempt to negotiate and send diplomatic messages. But where does this sudden change come from? Has the Trump administration come to the conclusion that the policy of maximum pressure against Iran has failed? Or this is only a tactic to buy time?

In a television interview, Vitcoaf announced in a television interview that Trump had sent a message to Tehran and suggested to “maintain mutual respect”. A significant difference with the threatening tone of Mike Waltz, the White House National Security Adviser, said last week that the Trump administration is seeking to completely dismantle Iran’s nuclear program. “These two completely contradictory stances reflect the deep divide in the Trump administration’s strategy. But this is not the first time the White House’s policies towards Iran have been confused.

When Trump left Brajam in the first round of his presidency, he promised to bring Iran to the negotiating table harder. But what happened was quite the opposite; Iran not only did not surrender, but it also expanded its nuclear activities and strengthened its regional influence. At that time, the White House repeatedly emphasized that no negotiation with Iran would be held unless Tehran completely abandon its nuclear program. Now, in year 3, despite all the threats and sanctions, the United States is not only seeking negotiations, but in a letter sent by Trump to Iran, it has also implicitly reduced the initial sanctions.

This change is attributed to American internal conditions. Trump, who is facing economic problems and public discontent, needs to introduce his foreign policy as a success. Entering a military conflict with Iran can be extremely costly for him, so he seeks to bring at least one interim agreement as an achievement through negotiation. But Iran, which has the experience of agreeing with the United States in the Brjam case, no longer easily deceives the White House’s promises.

The Supreme Leader of the Revolution, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, said in an indirect response to Trump’s message that the policy of threats against Iran was not working. Tehran has repeatedly emphasized that the negotiation does not accept pressure and that any dialogue must be based on mutual respect. This stance indicates that Trump’s offer will not be welcomed at least at this stage.

But changing Trump’s tone has a clear message: White House policies against Iran have failed. This failure is not limited to diplomacy; Rather, the signs are obvious in the field of action. In recent years, the United States has worked hard to isolate Iran economically and politically, but Iran has not only been isolated, but expanded its relations with Russia, China and even some Arab countries. This is a bitter fact for Trump that has been forced to move from power to a softer position.

But does this change position mean real retreat? Many believe that Trump continues to pursue sticks and carrots. On the one hand, he speaks of the diplomatic tone of the negotiation and, on the other hand, raises the threat of “military action”. This dual policy has been repeatedly observed in his government. When Trump sent a message of peace to North Korea, it increased the pressure of sanctions. When he spoke of the withdrawal of US troops from West Asia, he immediately dispatched more warships to the area. Now, against Iran, it has taken the same strategy.

But what is different this time is Iran’s reaction. Tehran, as in previous years, is no longer in the hope of reaching an agreement. Iran’s policymakers know that Trump is looking for a propaganda show and refuses to give real privileges. Therefore, in spite of economic pressures, Iran continues to insist on its positions.
In the meantime, American allies are also confused. The Zionist regime, which has always supported strict policies against Iran, is now looking at Trump’s tone with concern. “We cannot trust any new agreement with Iran,” Benjamin Netanyahu, the regime’s prime minister, said in response to Trump’s message. These remarks show that even close US allies are confused by the contradictions in Trump’s policies.

Also, in the United States itself there has been sharp differences. Hassy Republicans, such as Lindsi Graham, are opposed to any negotiations with Iran, believing that this is a dangerous retreat. On the other hand, some other American politicians believe that the continuation of the maximum pressure policy leads Iran to more aggressive measures and that diplomacy should be given the opportunity.

In this case, we have to see if Trump is really looking for a new agreement or simply trying to pressure Iran. The experience of recent years has shown that Trump often regulates his policies based on short -term personal interests and is less concerned with long -term strategies. If he can finish the Iranian crisis with a diplomatic show, he will undoubtedly do so, even if he is forced to temporarily withdraw from his previous positions.

But Iran is no longer a year-old an actor who is willing to enter into an agreement at any cost. Tehran, by learning from the past, seeks to have the upper hand in any possible negotiation and to avoid US diplomatic deceit. Therefore, what is happening is more than a strategic change from Washington, a tactical maneuver that will probably not bring Trump’s desired results.