In the latest episode of diplomatic theater, it appears that the United States and Iran are once again performing their favorite back-and-forth dance: the “are-we-or-aren’t-we” negotiation saga. The Treasury Secretary is reportedly optimistic about a potential deal with Iran, even as the Iranian side claims they’re chatting up Oman instead of directly talking to the U.S. It seems the folks at the negotiating table are engaged in a veritable game of international telephone, where nobody knows who’s saying what until it’s too late.
Mark Tissson, a voice familiar to conservative circles, doesn’t seem to buy Iran’s denials. It’s no secret that Iran has been a thorn in America’s side for over four decades, and President Trump, back in his day, decided to answer them in kind. Tissson points out, with a certain pride, that Trump managed to achieve quite the military makeover targeted at Iran’s infrastructure. Apparently, Trump’s campaign against Iran was like holding a yard sale, except instead of selling knick-knacks, he supposedly sunk their navy and grounded their air force.
The discussion moves to whether this bold approach should have been taken all the way to the finish line. After all, if Trump’s strategy was a football game, it seems it ended at the 20-yard line, just shy of a touchdown. However, settling for a field goal, 80 yards down the field, is an improvement over the efforts of past presidents who didn’t even make it to the red zone. It’s as if the administration has a golden opportunity to change the Middle Eastern diplomatic playbook but is content hovering around the sidelines, perhaps waiting for the right moment—or a less volatile market.
But wait, there’s a plot twist—Saudi Arabia, the oil giant that’s been under America’s protective wing, is reportedly advising against further escalation. The message to Saudi Arabia, as relayed by Tissson, is a bold rally cry: “Get behind us and let us finish the job.” After all, it’s puzzling why a nation that’s been shielded by the American defense umbrella would have such cold feet now, especially when Iran has historically presented plenty of tension in the region.
Considering the situation, Saudi Arabia and its neighboring Gulf states have their reasons for playing it safe. Maybe they value stability and lower gas prices, but one has to wonder if they’ve ever considered that eradicating the threat at its source might also make economic sense in the long run. Yet, the conversation drifts towards a staggering “what if,” as Tissson muses over what might happen after a decisive strike: perhaps an opportunity for the Iranian people to finally rise up and seize freedom with American assistance not so far behind.
Time will tell if the current administration will seize this purportedly final negotiating chance or take on a more aggressive approach to dealing with Iran. Meanwhile, the current moment of amicable discussions (or the façade thereof) only hints at a saga likely to stretch on, with future leaders needing the courage and tenacity displayed during Trump’s term. Stay tuned, folks, because it seems the curtain may rise for another act in this long-running geopolitical drama.
