The outreach to Tehran proved promising.
The first meeting in Oman between President Donald Trump’s special envoy Steve Witkoff and Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi of Iran was business-like, exchanging messages through Oman’s Foreign Minister Badr al-Busaidi. This initial round of discussions aimed at American desires for Iran to give up nuclear ambitions was described as “positive” and “constructive.” Though the engagement was indirect, Witkoff and Araghchi met face-to-face briefly.
Talks With Iran Modestly Hopeful
Before the meeting on Saturday, April 12, speculation held modest hope for any breakthroughs in Trump’s position that Iran must cease with its ambitions for acquiring nuclear warheads. The US chief executive has not been shy about his stance and what the consequences would be if the talks failed. As the Daily Caller reported:
“President Donald Trump told reporters in the White House Wednesday that he may join Israel in launching a strike against Iran if nuclear talks continue to stagnate. Trump said that military action alongside Israel was an option ‘if necessary’ amid his push to get Iran to the negotiating table on its pursuit of nuclear weapons.”
In a White House readout of the discussions, an official statement read: “Special Envoy Witkoff underscored to Dr. Araghchi that he had instructions from President Trump to resolve our two nations’ differences through dialogue and diplomacy if that is possible.” The “if … possible” foreshadows an alternative that the Trump delegation is hopeful will motivate the Iranians to reconsider and halt their atomic weapons program. However, in keeping with a carrot-and-stick approach to the mullahs in Tehran, the administration’s take on the meeting also offered a positive narrative. “These issues are very complicated, and Special Envoy Witkoff’s direct communication today was a step forward in achieving a mutually beneficial outcome,” the assessment concluded.
Many see a much more global consequence to the talks. When discussing the events and geopolitical nuances in the Middle East, there are no isolated instances. Everything is connected. When one Gulf Region nation catches a cold, another sneezes. Julian Epstein is one of those foreign policy watchers who has commented on the integrated relationships in the Middle East. In his New York Post opinion piece, titled: “Trump Iran talks could herald the biggest Mid-East reformation of our lifetime,” Epstein sees the meeting in Muscat, Oman, as setting the stage for a multi-faceted, larger international engagement formula.
His policy calculus involves Russia, China, and Saudi Arabia. Achieving with a velvet glove approach some level of a ceasefire between Moscow and Kyiv and securing Ukraine’s security with “economic boots” on the ground would allow the US and the West to remove energy sanctions on the Kremlin and bring Russia back into the Western financial sphere. Conversely, applying a more direct and crippling economic cudgel, “The US could further kneecap the Iranian-Chinese segment of the ‘Axis of Autocrats’ by sanctioning Iranian tankers that evade export sanctions and ship oil to China. Properly enforced, sanctions could stop the flow of Iranian oil to China in days,” Epstein explains. Iran exports over one and a half million barrels of oil per day to China and stopping that flow could prompt Beijing to pressure the Tehran government to be more considerate of the US proposals for denuclearization of Iran.
Saudi Arabia, on the other hand, would benefit from a reduction in tensions among its neighbors. Additionally, the Kingdom wants a closer relationship with the US and has offered nearly $1.5 trillion in US investments over four years. The economy of the entire region has the potential to grow with a peaceful resolution to Iran’s aggression directly and through proxies.
The Option to Use Hard Power Remains
Though currently Trump is exercising what foreign policy wonks call “soft power,” two aircraft carrier task forces will be in position in the Gulf, and six B-2 Spirit stealth bombers have deployed to the Diego Garcia military base in the Indian Ocean to execute hard power toward Iran, if necessary. The US president is serious and dedicated to eliminating Iran as a potential nuclear threat. “Military pressure appears to be a big reason Iran came to the table. Rebecca Grant, a senior fellow at the Lexington Institute, told the ‘Fox Report’ Saturday the US has sent a clear signal by moving powerful military assets into the region,” Fox News explained.
Furthermore, Iran must realize its bad behavior in the region needs to stop, and concluding a successful end to Tehran’s nuclear weapons aspirations is just the first step in bringing the Persians into line with acceptable peaceful norms. With the first round of talks between the US and Iran concluding in an agreement to reconvene on April 19, Trump’s methods appear to be fruitful. Having the capability and demonstrated willingness to wield the stick of the most powerful nation on earth has a way of persuading adversaries to adopt reasonable measures of civility.
The US Chief Executive, Donald Trump, has not had much use for foreign policy protocols or prolonged diplo-dancing. He is a straightforward negotiator, and Iran appears to appreciate that. Though Tehran’s leadership steadfastly maintained the talks would be “indirect,” a face-to-face conversation took place. But why wouldn’t it? The end to Iran’s nuclear ambitions and a broader path to Middle East peace is on the line.
The views expressed are those of the author and not of any other affiliate.
Liberty Nation does not endorse candidates, campaigns, or legislation, and this presentation is no endorsement.
