In a matter of days, US President Donald Trump has extended a hand to Iran and at the same time, has warned Tehran that it bears responsibility for any attacks by the Houthis in Yemen.
His administration has both demanded that Iran dismantle its nuclear program and offered more flexibility.
Trump has for years dangled force as a means to get his way in negotiations.
But on Iran, some observers see less a strategy than mixed messaging, with a real debate on how the norms-breaking president will handle a US adversary of nearly half a century.
“There is a lot of contradiction within the Trump administration on Iran,” said one Western diplomat, who asked not to be named due to the sensitive nature of the issue. “Sooner or later, it will have to come to a head,” according to AFP.
Trump said on March 7 that he had written a letter to Ali Khamenei offering talks on Iran's contested nuclear program, but also warning of potential military action if he refuses -- a threat also made by Israel.
Trump, who in his first term ripped up a 2015 nuclear deal negotiated by predecessor Barack Obama, returned to office saying he would resume his “maximum pressure” policy of sanctions but openly said he was doing so reluctantly out of deference to hawkish advisors.
Steve Witkoff, a friend of Trump who has quickly become his roving global envoy, hinted at compromise with Iran in a recent interview with Tucker Carlson, the conservative pundit and critic of military interventionism who dissuaded Trump from military action against Iran in his first term.
Witkoff said Trump was proposing a “verification program” to show Iran is not pursuing a nuclear weapon -- in line with Obama's deal, which was backed by European allies.
Trump's national security advisor, Mike Waltz, quickly said the goal remained “full dismantlement.”
Iran insists it is not seeking a nuclear bomb, but US intelligence believes it could build one quickly if it decided to do so.
While Trump is the chief decision-maker, he has not shown he is focused on Iran, and Witkoff is spread thin as he also negotiates on Gaza and Ukraine.
On Tuesday, Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi, “We have not yet responded to the US letter, and the response to this letter is being prepared and will be submitted soon through the appropriate channels.”
He reiterated that Iran will not have direct talks with the US under maximum pressure in the context of military threats and increased sanctions.
Khamenei already will struggle to accept negotiations with Trump due to his past track record, including ordering the killing of top Iranian commander Qasem Soleimani in 2020.
Alex Vatanka, a senior fellow at the Middle East Institute, voiced more optimism about diplomacy. He said Iran could even seek a deal of the sort Trump relishes, such as agreeing to buy US products after years of sanctions.
“If Iran was smart, they would take this opportunity and say, well, here's an American president who really doesn't seem that heavily involved in this issue,” Vatanka said.
“He just wants to be able to say that he got a better deal than Obama did in 2015.”
Trump's outreach comes at a weak point for Iran after Israel decimated its regional allies amid internal discontent over the economy.
Analysts assert that Iran is forced to negotiate with Trump, especially after the “Axis of Resistance” has suffered setbacks such as the collapse of Hamas, the weakening of Hezbollah, and the fall of the Assad regime.
Trump says Iran's military vulnerabilities appeared to have left it in a weakened position, making negotiations more appealing than confrontation.
In recent days, the US President has unleashed major attacks on Yemen's Iranian-linked Houthi insurgents who have been attacking Black Sea shipping in avowed solidarity with the Palestinians.
He warned Iran that if the Houthi attacks continued, there would be severe consequences for Iran.
Hanging over diplomacy is the prospect of military action by Israel, which already struck hard at Iran's air defenses last year.
Behnam Ben Taleblu, a senior fellow at the hawkish Foundation for Defense of Democracies, said that a “credible American and Israeli military threat is instrumental” in dealing with Iran's nuclear program, including in leveraging a strong agreement.
“There is a great amount of cognizance within folks in the administration that Tehran is trying to play the administration to stall for time, and that there needs to be some real benchmarks if diplomacy is going to be an option here,” he said.
