Iran seeks to recalibrate strategy as Trump returns to power

An article by Politico examines the shifting dynamics in US-Iran relations in light of the potential return of Donald Trump to the White House. The piece touches on Iran’s overtures to Trump, including diplomatic backchannels and cease-fire talks, as well as its broader strategy to navigate a more hawkish US administration. The analysis provides insights into the geopolitical landscape, Iran’s strategic calculations, and the role of Trump’s foreign policy, particularly toward Iran and the Middle East.

The article begins by highlighting Iran’s recent attempts to engage with the incoming Trump administration, signalling a shift in Tehran’s strategy. Iran is taking steps to rebuild its diplomatic channels with the US, possibly out of fear of what Trump’s return might mean. These overtures include a reported meeting between Elon Musk and Iran’s UN ambassador and ongoing ceasefire negotiations between Hezbollah (Iran's proxy in Lebanon) and Israel. Iran’s invitation to Rafael Grossi, the head of the UN nuclear watchdog, to visit Tehran also plays into this broader effort to defuse tensions over its nuclear program.

The author suggests that Iran’s diplomatic actions signal a fear of Trump’s return, particularly the prospect of facing a continuation or intensification of Trump’s "maximum pressure" campaign. The meeting with Musk, which reportedly sought to discuss easing tensions, is presented as a sign of Iran’s acknowledgment that it may need to soften its stance to avoid economic isolation and further diplomatic challenges under a Trump administration.

Most former Trump officials and Middle East analysts are quoted as expecting Trump to continue his tough stance toward Iran if he returns to power. His support for Israel and the "maximum pressure" strategy—which aimed to cripple Iran’s economy and isolate it diplomatically—are expected to dominate his approach. The piece notes that while Trump’s foreign policy may be hawkish, he is also a "transactional" leader, which creates room for potential negotiation, should Iran’s overtures be seen as genuine.

The article raises the question of whether Iran can use diplomacy to slow or ease the intensity of US pressure. As Behnam Ben Taleblu of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies points out, Iran will likely use every available tactic, including diplomacy and deception, to achieve this goal. Iran’s need to counteract US sanctions and pressure while preserving its regional influence seems to be guiding its diplomatic actions.

Trita Parsi, co-founder of the Quincy Institute, argues that Iran may have learned from its previous mistakes during Trump’s first term. By refusing to engage with Trump and his allies after his 2016 election win, Iran inadvertently paved the way for Israel, neoconservatives, and hawks within the Trump administration to push for even harsher policies, including crippling sanctions. This missed opportunity for diplomacy, according to Parsi, made it much easier for Trump to justify escalating pressure on Iran.

The article suggests that Iran may be hoping to avoid a repeat of this situation and is now attempting to re-engage with the US in order to prevent another "maximum pressure" campaign that could further destabilize its economy and nuclear ambitions. The piece presents this as part of Iran’s pragmatic approach to its long-term survival and its recognition that diplomatic isolation under Trump could have dire consequences.

Another key factor influencing Iran’s diplomacy is the ongoing military conflict between Israel and Iran’s proxies, such as Hezbollah and Hamas. As Israel continues to target these groups in Gaza and Lebanon, Iran’s military position in the region has been weakened. The article highlights how these military losses, coupled with humanitarian crises, might make Iran more amenable to negotiating with the US or, at the very least, trying to prevent further escalation.

However, the article leaves the question open as to whether these military setbacks will push Iran to cooperate with the US or prompt further resistance. It also suggests that while Trump is unlikely to rein in Israel’s retaliatory strikes on Iran, his return could mean continued pressure on Iran from both Israel and the US.

One of the more provocative points the article raises is that Iran’s efforts to "play nice" with Trump may be hindered by past actions, notably the assassination of General Qassem Soleimani, Iran’s top commander, in 2020. This event has led to Iranian attempts to assassinate former US officials, a factor that could complicate any efforts at rebuilding diplomatic ties. A former Trump administration official highlights this as a major obstacle, noting that despite any diplomatic overtures, the US will not forget Iran’s aggressive actions, including the killing of a high-profile American target.

This dynamic underscores the complexity of US-Iran relations, as personal and historical animosities between the two countries make diplomatic engagement more difficult. The assassination of Soleimani serves as a reminder of the deep distrust and animosity that persists between Washington and Tehran, despite any temporary attempts at diplomatic thawing.

The article suggests that Trump’s "maximum pressure" campaign, combined with his transactional approach to diplomacy, could either work to Iran’s disadvantage or provide opportunities for negotiation, depending on how Iran approaches the new administration. However, the piece acknowledges that the volatile and unpredictable nature of Trump’s foreign policy leaves much uncertainty. Iran's recent diplomatic outreach may be an attempt to get ahead of these uncertainties and ensure that it does not face the same level of isolation and economic pressure it did during Trump’s first term.

Overall, the opinion piece portrays Iran as trying to recalibrate its strategy in anticipation of Trump’s return to power. While Iran’s overtures—whether genuine or calculated—are aimed at reducing pressure and improving its diplomatic standing, the historical context of US-Iran relations suggests that these efforts will face significant hurdles.

Trump’s hawkish policies, along with Iran’s recent military losses and past antagonisms, create a complex environment in which Iran’s outreach may be seen as both an opportunity and a challenge for US policymakers. The article paints a picture of a high-stakes geopolitical game, where both Iran and the US are attempting to maneuver for favorable positions, even as past tensions loom large.

By Vafa Guliyeva