Trump’s patience may be running out on Iran

US President Donald Trump said Tuesday that Iran has become "much more aggressive" in its approach to negotiations on a nuclear deal, after saying yesterday that Iran’s expected response to a US proposal is unacceptable, warning of a "very, very dire" alternative if talks fail.

Iran is haggling to continue domestic enrichment of uranium, which is needed for a nuclear weapon, but Trump’s red line on enrichment has been clear from the start. 

The talks are expected to continue later this week, following submission of the Iranian counter-proposal, but time may be running out for Tehran, especially if it continues to dig in on enrichment.

Although some accounts have tried to highlight divisions between “MAGA” and “hawk” camps over how to deal with Iran, they may be missing the bigger story of a coherent and complex strategy that has Iran on defense.

To put it another way: since January, Trump has been conducting a master-class on Iran strategy: a combination of creative diplomacy, the credible threat of force, a timeline and a connection to a broader vision of regional integration.

First, the diplomatic choreography under Trump’s direction has been striking, featuring prominent roles for Israel; the Arab Gulf states — particularly Oman, which has served as a trusted mediator; the International Atomic Energy Agency, backed by key European powers and poised to rebuke Iran for violating the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT); and even Russia, despite its longstanding military and economic ties to Tehran.

Trump’s Middle East envoy, Steve Witkoff — who also oversees the Russia and Gaza portfolios — is, simply put, Trump’s man. There is no daylight between them on regional policy. Beyond enjoying the president’s full confidence, Witkoff is widely described by all parties as a trusted, tireless and effective negotiator.

Second, the threat of force has never been more credible. While Trump has said that he prefers a deal, he has also said a military strike is possible if talks collapse. This is, in practice, what he means by peace through strength.

Gen. Michael “Erik” Kurilla, head of the US Central Command (CENTCOM), said Tuesday that he has prepared a “wide range” of military options for the president if the nuclear talks collapse.

And in Tehran, it is not forgotten that it was Trump who ordered the killing of Qasem Soleimani, commander of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps’ Quds Force, in January 2021.

Israel adds to the credibility of a military strike if talks fail. Tehran is on edge over a possible Israeli attack and not just from the air, but from within. Israel has shown its ground game in Syria and Lebanon, where it has picked off its adversaries and infiltrated strategic sites, and in Iran itself, where it killed Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh in July 2024, who was staying at a government guest house after attending the inauguration of President Masoud Pezeshkian.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu would, of course, prefer a military strike on Iran and the collapse of the nuclear talks. He and Trump spoke again on Monday about Iran. While Netanyahu may have considered going it alone to hit Iran at some point, he is now fully aligned with Trump’s strategy. Israel, for its part, is ready to strike on a moment’s notice, as Ben Caspit reports.

Third, Trump set a deadline for the talks from the start, a contrast to the endless indirect negotiations under the previous administration. Trump knows Iran would prefer to tap along in the talks for months or even years. A 60-day window may be up soon if Iran doesn’t close the deal. 

Fourth, Trump’s Iran policy is linked to his plans for a remake of the Middle East, anchored in a new US-led regional reality that prioritizes commerce over conflict. His vision and strategy have the full buy-in from America’s partners in the Gulf, which was on display during his meetings with leaders in Saudi Arabia, Qatar and the UAE last month.  

Trump has shown, working with the Gulf, that he is ready to go big and move fast, such as in Syria, by lifting sanctions. “[Trump] made an unbelievable decision on his own just to rip the band-aid off,” US Ambassador to Turkey and Syria Envoy Tom Barrack told Elizabeth Hagedorn. “This was Trump being Trump, not his advisers, and it was brilliant.”

That same intensity, speed and strategic vision will kick in once a ceasefire is reached in Gaza and all hostages returned. Trump wants the war to wind down sooner rather than later. He even mentioned this week that Iran has been involved with other parties in a “massive negotiation” over Gaza. On the horizon, after the Gaza War, is a major expansion of the Abraham Accords, a landmark achievement of the first Trump administration.

The catch for this broader vision is that it requires a solution on Iran, one way or the other. A nuclear armed Iran would upend a trend toward commerce and integration. Trump has hinted that Iran, if it changes course, could see a brighter economic future. The Arab Gulf states are ready to invest in Iran’s economy, but only if Iran agrees to a deal and sanctions are lifted.  

That can only happen if Iran can get over its “right” to enrichment. On that score, Trump’s pitch for a regional consortium of Iran and the Arab Gulf states to manage Iran’s enrichment program is pure genius. Under this plan, Iran can enrich, perhaps even at limited levels during an interim period, according to reports. Over time, enrichment could continue, but with regional partners under strict monitoring; a face-saving off ramp that Iran should seize. If implemented, a consortium would be a giant step toward regional cooperation on civil nuclear energy, a long-sought goal, while clipping Iran’s nuclear weapons ambitions.

Even if Iran agrees to a nuclear deal, a Reagan-esque “trust but verify” vigilance will be required. Iran will need to rein in the Houthis. Attacks from Yemen on Israel and Gulf shipping can’t continue. Iran should be prevented from spending a post-sanctions windfall to rebuild its proxy networks in Lebanon, Gaza and elsewhere. Iraq, which holds elections in November, is an open question, viewed by many in the region as in Iran’s pocket and a mostly lost cause, absent a change.

Iran, under Trump’s maximum pressure, must feel that time is running out, its options shutting down. That Trump could enlist Vladimir Putin as a possible mediator has likely exasperated Iran’s leaders, whether Putin is able to deliver or not, as Hagedorn writes for Al-Monitor. The diplomatic trendlines, backed up by the threat of force, are all in Trump’s favor.  

Trump’s approach could also touch a nerve inside Iran. The ayatollahs are increasingly out of touch with the country’s youth, who see the prosperity of the Arab Gulf states and wonder why Iran remains stuck in the past. A long fuse has been lit on the government’s social contract since the death of Mahsa Amini in police custody for a hijab violation in September 2022.  

Let’s see what Iran offers in its counter-proposal. Expectations are low that Iran can move beyond its obsession with domestic uranium enrichment, an obvious hedge to maintain its clandestine programs and status as a threshold nuclear weapons state. While the Trump administration can’t make the decision for Tehran, it has set the terms and consequences more clearly than they have ever been — the art of the deal, or some “very, very dire” alternative.