Iran has recently hinted at a willingness to engage in dialogue with Donald Trump, urging the president-elect to reconsider his administration’s policies toward the nation following accusations from the US that Iran had plotted to assassinate him.
Mohammad Javad Zarif, the Vice President for Strategic Affairs, encouraged Mr. Trump to rethink the “maximum pressure” strategy he pursued during his initial term, which many believe exacerbated tensions between the two nations.
“Trump needs to demonstrate that he won’t be following the misguided policies of his predecessors,” Zarif remarked during a press conference.
His comments emerged after the US leveled allegations against Iran regarding an assassination conspiracy, claims that Zarif and others have dismissed as “completely baseless.”
“As if a killer exists in reality, some screenwriters have to conjure up a farcical script to sell their narrative,” said Abbas Araghchi, responding to the American allegations.
Relations between the US and Iran have been strained since the Islamic Revolution in 1979, which led to the severance of official diplomatic ties.
Zarif, a seasoned figure in diplomacy who previously held the position of foreign minister, played a crucial role in solidifying the 2015 nuclear agreement between Iran and several Western countries, including the United States. However, this landmark deal met its end in 2018 when Trump decided to pull out unilaterally, subsequently reactivating sanctions against Iran.
This withdrawal prompted Iran to scale back its commitments under the accord significantly, with uranium enrichment levels rising to 60%, alarmingly close to weapons-grade material.
Repeatedly, Iran has refuted Western claims of its ambitions to develop nuclear arms. Zarif indicated that it was Trump’s approach that led to this escalation in enrichment. “He should recognize that the pressure tactics he initiated pushed our enrichment from 3.5% to 60% and led to the increased deployment of centrifuges,” he explained.
“As a pragmatic individual, he ought to do the math — weigh the pros and cons of his policies to decide whether to persist with or pivot from this detrimental strategy,” Zarif continued.
In December 2017, Trump’s administration made headlines by acknowledging Jerusalem as Israel’s capital, which was followed by the relocation of the American embassy there the next year. Furthermore, he endorsed Israeli claims to the Golan Heights, territories Israel captured from Syria in 1967.
During his presidency, Trump authorized the drone strike that ended the life of Qasem Soleimani, a significant Iranian military leader in charge of the Quds Force, which oversees Iran’s overseas operations. Soleimani was killed in Baghdad in January 2020, a moment that intensified hostilities between Iran and the US.
Since the overthrow of the US-supported shah in 1979, Iran has not recognized Israel as a state. Yet, on a recent occasion, Esmaeil Baghaei, a spokesman for Iran’s foreign ministry, expressed hope that a potential Trump victory might prompt the US to “reconsider the misguided policies of the past,” although he refrained from directly naming Trump.
On election day, Trump declared to reporters that he wasn’t out to “harm Iran.” He articulated his position: “My terms are simple. They cannot possess a nuclear weapon. I’d like to see them thrive as a nation.” This statement followed him casting his vote.
Iran maintains that its nuclear endeavors are aimed solely at peaceful civilian uses. Trump’s electoral win materialized amid direct hostilities between Iran and Israel, provoking widespread concerns over escalating regional conflicts, particularly amidst the crises in Gaza and Lebanon.
Thus, it appears that both nations stand at a crossroads, caught in a historical narrative fraught with animosity yet glimmers of potential dialogue beckon. Will the past influence the future, or is there room for a new chapter?
Edited by: Ali Musa
alimusa@axadletimes.com
Axadle international–Monitoring
