Decoding the contradictory messages of the Trump administration

Just when the fourth round of indirect nuclear negotiations between Tehran and Washington was scheduled to take place in Rome, the capital of Italy, we witnessed a postponement of these talks.

Various news and analytical sources have speculated extensively on this matter, with the most prominent reasons being: the imposition of new sanctions by the U.S. government on Iran, threats to Iran's security by the U.S. Defense Secretary under the Trump administration, internal disagreements within the U.S. government regarding the negotiations, the U.S. backtracking on accepting the principle of uranium enrichment on Iranian soil, and more.

The reality is that all these reasons exist, and yet, in truth, none of them do! There are several points to consider in this regard:

First, Trump is aware of the negative stance of individuals like Mike Waltz and Marco Rubio toward nuclear negotiations with Iran, and this realization did not dawn on the U.S. president within the last 24 hours! In other words, Waltz’s dismissal was not a result of his opposition to the negotiation process; rather, other reasons must be sought.

Second, the opposition of figures like Marco Rubio, the U.S. Secretary of State, to uranium enrichment on Iranian soil (even at the 3.67% level) is not a new development. Trump was fully aware of this even before the first round of talks in Muscat. Notably, Wittkopf, the U.S. representative in the negotiations, claimed from the outset that the White House had no issue with industrial-scale enrichment in Iran. Yet now, we are witnessing conflicting messages in this regard!

Third, the U.S. government had informally committed not to impose sanctions on Iran or issue threats against our country during the negotiation period. However, not only have the U.S. Secretaries of Defense and State, but also the U.S. president himself, explicitly threatened our country and imposed sanctions on us!

Putting these factors together reveals that the U.S. is employing a worn-out formula in dealing with nuclear negotiations: sending multiple contradictory and paradoxical signals to Iran and the international community within a single timeframe, in an attempt to, as they claim, distort the broader context of the talks. Washington’s goal in this distortion is to influence the substance of the negotiations and alter the Islamic Republic of Iran’s red lines.

The reality is that the Islamic Republic of Iran is wisely and decisively monitoring the nature and shape of the Trump administration’s tactical maneuvers in these negotiations.

Iran will never allow Washington to manipulate public opinion or use contradictory and multifaceted messages to change or even dilute Iran’s red lines in the nuclear dossier. What Trump refers to as “tactical rationality” could soon become the Achilles’ heel of his foreign policy. The U.S. has very little time to make amends in the nuclear negotiations with Tehran. It would be wise for Trump not to further test Iran’s strategic patience in the face of his repetitive schemes.