Very interesting analysis on what really happened and Iran’s distrust of the US. There is wiggle room here, as I was convinced the Iranian regime was involved and betrayed Hezbollah regarding the pagers and radios with explosives inside, as the jihadists are dangerous to them as well, the whole keep your enemies closer gambit. Of course maybe they were working with the west behind the scenes, and this was yet another betrayal by the west? <\/p>\n\n\n\n
https:\/\/original.antiwar.com\/ted_snider\/2025\/06\/16\/americas-deception-strengthens-iranian-hardliners\/<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n By Ted Snider <\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cI gave Iran chance after chance to make a deal. I told them, in the strongest of words, to \u2018just do it,\u2019 but no matter how hard they tried, no matter how close they got, they just couldn\u2019t get it done\u2026. Certain Iranian hardliner\u2019s spoke bravely, but they didn\u2019t know what was about to happen. They are all DEAD now, and it will only get worse!\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n Trump made this post<\/a> on the morning that Israel struck Iran. Expressing the belief that the devastating attacks on Iran would weaken Iran\u2019s hardliners and push them to capitulate to U.S. terms and sign a nuclear deal, Trump said<\/a>, \u201cThey should now come to the table to make a deal before it\u2019s too late\u2026. You know, the [hardliners] I was dealing with are dead.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n The belief that the strikes will weaken the hardliners and improve the chances of forcing Iran to accept a deal that eliminates their peaceful, civilian nuclear program is wrong.<\/p>\n\n\n\n As the strikes on Iran began, U.S. officials insisted that they were not involved in any way. In the first several hours, the only statement coming out of Washington was from the State Department. Though Secretary of State Marco Rubio said Israel had \u201cadvised\u201d the U.S. of the action, he called the action a \u201cunilateral action\u201d and said the U.S. was \u201cnot involved in strikes against Iran.\u201d Trump posted<\/a> that \u201cThe U.S. had nothing to do with the attack on Iran.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n But Israeli officials told a different story. Though Iran had long been planning for an Israeli attack if nuclear negotiations with the U.S. failed, they thought they were safe while talks remained alive and continued. They did not consider an attack<\/a> just days before the next round of talks.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Israeli officials not only say that that was the plan, but that the United States, and Trump specifically, were part of the deception. Shortly after the strikes began, Israeli officials claimed<\/a> that, while Trump and his team publicly opposed the attack, they privately gave a \u201cclear\u2026 green light.\u201d They even claimed that public reports that Trump had told Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on a phone call not to strike Iran, \u201cin reality the call dealt with coordination ahead of the attack.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n This claim has not been confirmed<\/a>, and the U.S. has denied it<\/a>. It does appear, though, that Trump gave, if not a \u201cclear green light,\u201d then tacit approval. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Though it is not clear that the attacks were coordinated with the Americans, comments made by Trump<\/a>, like \u201cTwo months ago I gave Iran a 60-day ultimatum to \u2018make a deal.\u2019 They should have done it! Today is day 61\u201d don\u2019t help. He has also implied advanced notice of future plans: \u201cthe next already planned attacks\u201d could be \u201ceven more brutal,\u201d he warned<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Trump has not only confirmed that he knew the strikes were coming, he has been congratulatory, calling<\/a> the strikes \u201ca very successful attack.\u201d \u201cI think it\u2019s been excellent,\u201d he told<\/a> ABC News. \u201cWe gave them a chance and they didn\u2019t take it. They got hit hard, very hard. They got hit about as hard as you\u2019re going to get hit. And there\u2019s more to come, a lot more.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n Trump has even contextualized the military strikes as part of the negotiating strategy<\/a>: \u201cI couldn\u2019t get them to a deal in 60 days. They were close, they should have done it. Maybe now it will happen.\u201d Asked by a reporter whether he thought the military strikes would harm diplomatic efforts, he answered, \u201cI don\u2019t think so. Maybe the opposite. Maybe now they will negotiate seriously.\u201d \u201cNow,\u201d he posted<\/a>, \u201cthey have, perhaps, a second chance!\u201d Trump seemed to be leveraging the attacks<\/a> to strengthen the American bargaining position: \u201cIran must make a deal, before there is nothing left, and save what was once known as the Iranian Empire. No more death, no more destruction, JUST DO IT, BEFORE IT IS TOO LATE.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n But the dangerously risky strategy may have failed. Iran pulled out of the next scheduled round of negotiations. Esmaeil Baghaei, a spokesman for Iran\u2019s Foreign Ministry, said<\/a> that the U.S. \u201cacted in a way that makes dialogue meaningless.\u201d He explained that \u201cit will be meaningless to participate in dialogue with the party that is the biggest supporter and accomplice of the aggressor.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n The bombs falling on Iran changed nothing in Iran\u2019s negotiating position. \u201cWe are prepared for any agreement aimed at ensuring Iran does not pursue nuclear weapons,\u201d Iranian foreign minister Abbas Araghchi said<\/a>. But he continued to insist that there would be no deal that \u201cdeprives Iran of its nuclear rights,\u201d meaning the right granted it as a signatory to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty to enrich uranium for peaceful civilian purposes.<\/p>\n\n\n\n But there is also the possibility that the strategy will do damage to more than the short-term prospect of negotiations. There is the possibility that it will reinforce a long history of U.S. actions that have discredited Iranian reformists who are willing to negotiate with the U.S. and improve relations and fortify hardliners who are not.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian was elected on a promise of direct negotiations with the United States. Though Iran\u2019s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei supported him and fully empowered Iran\u2019s negotiating team, he also warned<\/a> that \u201cOne must not negotiate with a government like the US government. Negotiations with it is not wise, it is not intelligent, and is not honorable.\u201d Later, Khamenei would further explain in a post<\/a> that \u201c[t]his same US president tore up the signed JCPOA agreement. How could we hold negotiations with US when we know they don\u2019t fulfill their commitments?\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n Khamenei\u2019s scepticism was not born with Trump but has evolved out of a long line of U.S. betrayals and Iranian reformers failures. Those betrayals have had the caustic consequence of discrediting the reformist camp and strengthening hardliners who are more hostile to the United States. Former reformist presidents Hashemi Rafsanjani, Seyyed Mohammad Khatami, and Hassan Rouhani have all suffered the same fate that now confronts Pezeshkian for daring to deal with America.<\/p>\n\n\n\n When Rafsanjani offered to exert Iran\u2019s regional influence and intervene to help win the release of American hostages being held in Lebanon, President George H.W. Bush promised that Iran would get something in return because \u201cgoodwill begets goodwill.\u201d Iran did what it promised to do; America did not do what it promised to do. Instead, the U.S. sent word that Rafsanjani should expect no American reciprocation. Rafsanjani and the reformists were discredited.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Rafsanjani tried one more time, staying officially neutral when Iraq invaded Kuwait while allowing the U.S. to use Iranian airspace. Once again, though, Iranian reformers gave but did not get. When the US convened the Israeli-Palestinian Madrid Conference, they invited nearly every affected nation, but snubbed Iran, perpetuating the isolation of Iran.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Reformist president Khatami rejected terrorism; accepted a two-state solution, implicitly recognizing the State of Israel; aided the U.S. in its fight against the Taliban and al-Qaeda; and played a crucial role in setting up Afghanistan\u2019s post-Taliban government. In return, George W. Bush awarded Iran with a seat in the Axis of Evil. Khatami was stunned, and the reformists were discredited. <\/p>\n\n\n\n In 2013, Iranians returned a reformist to power. Rouhani bet everything on negotiating Iran\u2019s civilian nuclear program with the United States. But Rouhani and the reformists were, once again, disgraced and discredited when Donald Trump, in his first term, broke America\u2019s promise and pulled out of the JCPOA nuclear agreement.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The Iranian perception that the U.S. may have used diplomacy, and specifically the promise of a sixth round of talks, to cover for military strikes will make it even more difficult for an already distrustful Iran to trust the U.S. in any future negotiations. Contrary to the American bet that military strikes could weaken the Iranian hardliners and push forward the negotiations, they may make negotiations even more difficult, discredit Iranian reformers willing to negotiate, and strengthen the hardliners. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Ted Snider is a regular columnist on U.S. foreign policy and history at <\/em>Antiwar.com and <\/em>The Libertarian Institute. He is also a frequent contributor to <\/em>Responsible Statecraft andThe American Conservative as well as other outlets. To support his work or for media or virtual presentation requests, contact him at <\/em>tedsnider@bell.net<\/em><\/a>.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Very interesting analysis on what really happened and Iran’s distrust of the US. There is wiggle room here, as I was convinced the Iranian regime was involved and betrayed Hezbollah regarding the pagers and radios with explosives inside, as the jihadists are dangerous to them as well, the whole keep your enemies closer gambit. Of […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[7],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-12312","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-world"],"blocksy_meta":[],"featured_image_src":null,"author_info":{"display_name":"Jason","author_link":"https:\/\/jasonsblog.ddns.net\/index.php\/author\/jturning\/"},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/jasonsblog.ddns.net\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/12312","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/jasonsblog.ddns.net\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/jasonsblog.ddns.net\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/jasonsblog.ddns.net\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/jasonsblog.ddns.net\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=12312"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/jasonsblog.ddns.net\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/12312\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":12313,"href":"https:\/\/jasonsblog.ddns.net\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/12312\/revisions\/12313"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/jasonsblog.ddns.net\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=12312"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/jasonsblog.ddns.net\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=12312"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/jasonsblog.ddns.net\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=12312"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}