Threatening Tehran with further attacks unless it returns to negotiations makes little sense when the president himself says the regime cannot be trusted—and when the Iranian people cannot overthrow it without meaningful outside support. There is something deeply strange about President Donald Trump’s insistence that Iran must return to the negotiating table, or face additional American strikes.
After all, Trump himself has repeatedly described the Iranian leadership as dishonest, fanatical and incapable of honoring its commitments. The recent memorandum and ceasefire have already broken down, while Tehran has again rejected negotiations under military pressure. Yet the administration’s answer is apparently to bomb Iran until the same regime agrees to sign another document.
What, precisely, would such an agreement accomplish? Treaty is valuable only when the parties signing it believe they are bound by it, or when an enforcement mechanism makes violating it prohibitively expensive. According to Trump’s own assessment, Iran’s rulers are not reliable negotiating partners. If that is true, returning to negotiations cannot itself be the strategic objective. At most, negotiations should formalize a reality that has already been created by overwhelming American power. Instead, Washington appears to be using military force not to produce a decisive outcome, but to bring Iran back into an endless diplomatic process. That is not a strategy. It is a cycle. (Ed note: Whatever the conclusion is to Iran, prophecy tells us that after this time, Persia will make a second appearance in Ezekiel 38:5.) (Read More)
