The theocratic state rejected President Donald Trump’s overtures in a letter to Islamic Republic of Iran’s supreme leader, Ali Khamenei, seeking to jump-start discussions on dismantling Tehran’s illegal nuclear weapons program on Sunday following Trump’s most recent warning to the regime.
Trump declared on NBC on Saturday that “There will be bombing if they don’t make a deal.” “But there’s a chance that if they don’t make a deal, I will impose secondary tariffs on them as I did four years ago.”
Trump said the United States and Islamic Republic authorities are “talking.”
According to the Associated Press, Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian stated on Sunday, “We don’t avoid talks; it’s the breach of promises that has caused problems for us so far.” He said, “They have to show they can establish confidence.” The AP said the White House did not react right away to Iran’s dismissal of the negotiations.
Pezeshkian nonetheless pointed out that in Iran’s letter answer, indirect talks with the Trump administration remained feasible.
The unmistakable return of Iran’s regime to its usual script of opaque indirect discussions between the United States and Tehran’s authorities raises doubts about whether Trump will authorize military attacks to destroy Iran’s large nuclear weapons program.
Trump may also help the Jewish state in destroying Iran’s nuclear weapons system following two significant missile and drone assaults on Israel last year.
According to Democratic and Republican administrations, indirect negotiations between the United States and the world’s greatest state-sponsor of terrorism have not driven Iran to give up its nuclear weapon ambitions.
United Against Nuclear Iran (UANI) policy director Jason Brodsky told AWN Digital that the Iranians “do not want to provide President Trump a casus belli to strike Iran’s nuclear program. Various middlemen might provide indirect and non-public reactions. Some Iranian officials, in my opinion, see a split within President Trump’s national security staff on Iran. This clarifies remarks made by Iran’s foreign minister in the last several days on President Trump’s letter to the supreme leader creating both possibilities and difficulties.
“These Iranian officials want to bypass seasoned hands like President Trump’s national security advisor and secretary of state, who have been pushing for the dismantlement of Iran’s whole nuclear program in line with President Trump’s long-standing and justified stance on this matter, and develop people around President Trump who lack knowledge of Iran or are deemed non-traditional conservatives who would be more open to their entrees,” Brodsky stated.
Trump vowed that if the government did not come to the table for nuclear talks, “bad things” would follow. He stated on Friday, “My major preference is that we work it out with Iran; yet, if we don’t, negative consequences for Iran will follow.”
Just short of the 90% weapons-grade, Iran is enriching uranium to 60%. Experts claim that if Iran were to take the last actions to constructing one, it may have a nuclear bomb within weeks. According to a U.N. atomic agency study, AWN Digital revealed in late March that Iran’s government had enriched enough uranium to produce six nuclear bombs.
Khamenei could be indicating that he is not interested in talks, but his government urgently needs economic help, Iranian-American Iran specialist Alireza Nader said to AWN Digital. Otherwise, he may face another well-liked revolt. Khamenei lacks the cards.
Many Iranians are unhappy with the reign of 85-year-old Khamenei.
Since Trump informed FOX Business he wrote a letter to Khamenei, Iran has raised the stakes. Iran has released video of their subterranean “missile city.”
Trump also said on FOX Business, “I would rather negotiate a deal.”
He went on, “I’m not sure that everyone agrees with me, but we can reach a deal that would be just as good as if you won militarically.” But the moment is now, the moment is approaching.
One way or another, something will happen. I wish Iran, and I’ve sent them a letter stating I hope you’re going to talk since if we have to go in militarily, it’s going to be a horrible thing for them.
Brodsky stated, “That means the Islamic Republic can dangle a JCPOA-like deal, with little changes from the prior 2015 pact. Iranian media has been promoting such an arrangement.
Trump left the Obama-negotiated Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action accord in 2018 because, he contended, the pact did not guarantee Iran would not construct nuclear weapons and did not formalize limits on Tehran’s missile development and support of Islamist terrorism.
These Iranian officials think they can entice the Trump administration into this agreement and then President Trump will wave a magic wand and gather the whole Republican Party along with Democrats to embrace the deal and make it more politically durable than the 2015 JCPOA. All of this is in spite of President Trump’s steady and strong history in opposing the JCPOA structure. It shows desperation in Tehran and a want to purchase time with yet another unsuccessful diplomatic gamble. But it’s crucial to keep eyes wide open here as to the games the Iranians will (and are now) playing.
Though Trump’s director of national intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard, testified Tuesday before the Senate Intelligence Committee that the intelligence community “continues to assess that Iran is not building a nuclear weapon and Supreme Leader Khamanei has not authorized the nuclear weapons program he suspended in 2003,” she did acknowledge that Iran raised its enriched uranium stockpile.
AWN Digital has already revealed that European intelligence services think Iran is moving toward developing an atomic weapon and wanted illegal technologies for its nuclear weapons program, in striking contrast to U.S. intelligence since 2003.
Experts in counter-proliferation, such as the well-known physicist and nuclear specialist David Albright, have informed AWN that European intelligence agencies evaluate Iran’s progress in comparison to America’s claimed antiquated definition using a revised definition of construction of weapons of mass destruction.
