Three issues to watch in Trump’s emerging Iran policy approach

The biggest recent development to emerge from the still-evolving Middle East policy of President Donald Trump’s second administration was the initiation of talks between the United States and Iran in Oman last Saturday, with the next round reportedly on track for later this week. This small sign of hope for diplomatic progress comes at a time when the Trump administration continues to implement an assertive and unpredictable economic unilateralism that has roiled global markets and reduced trust and confidence between the United States and most of its close international partners. How this broader approach on foreign policy, one that devalues international cooperation, plays out on the Iran file will be important to monitor.

US national security: An antagonistic unilateralism combined with selective bilateralism

Nearly three months into the new administration, President Trump and his team have advanced a vision for the international system in which the United States dominates the agenda by employing unilateral economic nationalism. Tactically, it relies on unprecedentedly high customs duties, threats of additional tariffs, and attempts to win leverage by throwing America’s economic heft around.

The main target of these efforts is China, America’s chief global rival and competitor. But the damage done to US foreign relations by this zero-sum thinking, which eschews international, multilateral, and mini-lateral processes and regimes, remains to be seen; other countries are already recalibrating in light of the administration’s disruptive style.

Trump 2.0’s approach is also imbued with a selective bilateralism that is highly personalized and transactional. A prime example of this was witnessed earlier this week, in Trump’s bilateral meeting with El Salvadoran President Nayib Bukele, who has emerged as a willing supporter of the US president’s aggressive and harsh mass deportation policies. Trump’s national security template in his second term is to find partners who help him get results, even if the means used to achieve those outcomes break international norms and strain America’s democratic system of checks and balances at home.

US Middle East policy: What to watch for as Iran talks continue

The new template for US foreign policy that Trump is advancing has already had an impact on his approach to the Middle East, and Iran may be its most important test. Tehran is closer than ever to being able to produce a nuclear weapon, and it maintains partnerships with regional terrorist groups and extremist organizations in an “Axis of Resistance” that, although battered by the past year and a half of war, remains operational and capable of doing significant damage. Three things to watch closely as Trump’s Iran policy evolves and his broader national security approach unfolds:

1. Divisions within Trump’s own team. Steve Witkoff, Trump’s special envoy to the Middle East, sounded a different tone in media interviews than other members of the Trump administration following his talks with Iran in Oman earlier this week. National Security Advisor Michael Waltz had previously indicated that Trump’s approach was the “full dismantlement” of Iran’s nuclear program, but Witkoff suggested that Washington might be open to something less than full dismantlement, before seeming to reverse course and walk back his comments just 12 hours later. Some members of Trump’s team, including Vice President JD Vance and Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard, are reportedly open to more concessions with Iran in order to avoid military conflict, which puts them at odds with voices like Secretary of State Marco Rubio.

2. Gaps between the United States and key Middle East partners. The gaps among Trump’s team on Iran policy are mirrored by significant strategic and tactical differences between many of America’s partners in the Middle East. Israel has prioritized the full dismantlement of Iran’s nuclear program, with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu arguing for a “Libya model.” Arab Gulf countries such as Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Kuwait, and Qatar prioritize avoiding any additional military conflict and threats to their borders — as the insecurity of the past few years, particularly the increased attacks some of these countries experienced during Trump 1.0’s “maximum pressure” approach, remain vivid memories.

3. Who will monitor and verify a potential deal with Iran? Last but not least is the question of which institutions will be charged with monitoring and verifying a potential deal with Iran. The Trump administration distrusts the United Nations and other international institutions and is also continuing with plans to make massive cuts in America’s own foreign policy institutions, like the State Department, which might be tasked with oversight.

Trump’s emerging Iran policy will depend on how the next round of talks go, but the moves he is making on his broader foreign policy, along with divisions among his own national security team and splits between key US Middle East partners, will also determine whether the outcomes of this approach will be sustained and lasting.

 

Brian Katulis is a Senior Fellow at MEI.

Photo by Fatemeh Bahrami/Anadolu via Getty Images