RUTHFULLY YOURS

The Trump administration is once again engaging with the Iranian regime, this time in Oman, to encourage it to end its nuclear weapons and ballistic missile programs the way Libya’s late leader Muammar Ghaddafi did. As US President Donald J. Trump transparently put it: “I would love to make a deal with them without bombing them.”

In recent weeks, the Trump administration has called for direct talks with Iran, in the apparent belief that a fresh deal — tougher, broader and more binding than the Obama administration’s 2105 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) — could prevent Iran from an imminent nuclear weapons breakout.

Unfortunately, the Islamic Republic of Iran has never been thrillingly honest about its nuclear ambitions, although, in fairness, an Iranian “senior aid” has already let it be known that the regime might “expel UN inspectors if the threat persists” and transfer “stocks of enriched uranium to secret locations.”

Iran’s acceptance of talks is a tactic, not a transformation. Cornered by growing U.S. and Israeli threats, as well as unprecedented isolation, the mullahs seem, as always, to be seeking to buy time and ease the pressure. Tehran only negotiates when it is desperate.

The regime’s back is now against the wall.

Tehran understands full well that refusing to talk, especially with a Trump administration that has shown a willingness to escalate militarily, could invite devastating consequences. That is why the regime is willing to engage — out of fear of military strikes, fear of economic collapse and fear of regime change.

Today, the Islamic Republic of Iran finds itself at one of the most vulnerable points in its 45-year history. In December 2024, the Assad regime in Syria — Tehran’s most crucial Arab ally — collapsed after years of civil war and sustained Israeli strikes. On top of that, Iran’s regional proxies — from the Houthis in Yemen to Hamas and Hezbollah — have been severely degraded thanks to a reinvigorated Israeli military campaign. Tehran’s hold over the region has been weakening. Internally, the economy is near collapse. The regime is reeling. Under these conditions, who would refuse to talk? Especially when the alternative is an Israeli-American air campaign targeting one’s nuclear facilities?

Negotiations for the mullahs are simply a sign of strategic necessity. The regime needs breathing room — and, most importantly, it needs to preserve what it sees as its ultimate insurance policy: a nuclear arsenal.

Tehran has played this game before: Agree to talks. Make vague promises. Extract sanctions relief. Then quietly continue nuclear development under the radar. This formula has worked for more than two decades. Right now, the only reason Iran is talking is to stall, to promise just enough to prevent America from striking it — “We are almost there!” — to keep its regime and avoid seeing its uranium centrifuges and enrichment sites blasted to rubble. The regime does not want war — but it also cannot accept total nuclear disarmament.

It is naive, even dangerous, to believe that Iran will dismantle its nuclear program. This is a regime that has spent decades investing billions of dollars, building secret facilities and deceiving international inspectors. Since the early 2000s, when Iran’s clandestine program was first exposed during the Bush administration by the National Council of Resistance of Iran, U.S. presidents have tried every approach imaginable. George W. Bush pursued harsh sanctions and isolation. Barack Obama chose appeasement, bribes and diplomacy. Joe Biden returned to the JCPOA framework in the hope of resurrecting some deal. None of these efforts worked. The Islamic Republic has smoothly outmaneuvered every administration. It has accepted deals to avoid confrontation, then quietly violated them. With each round of negotiations, Iran gained what it needed — time, money, legitimacy — and gave away nothing it could not reverse.

Tehran is no longer trying to get to the nuclear weapons threshold — it is there. According to recent intelligence assessments, Iran could produce weapons-grade uranium in a matter of weeks. It already most likely possesses the technological know-how to assemble multiple nuclear warheads. The West allowed this crisis to happen by trusting in a process that was flawed from the outset. Worse, Iranian officials have themselves confirmed what skeptics have long argued: that the regime’s nuclear program was always military in nature. Former parliamentary speaker Ali Motahhari openly admitted in an interview that the Islamic Republic’s nuclear activities were initially designed to build weapons, not generate electricity. That was not a slip of the tongue. It was a rare moment of honesty from a system built on lies.

For the United States, the window for diplomacy has already closed. Further talks will only serve Iran’s interests. Tehran, playing a long game, appears to be willing to wait out the Trump administration, or, worse yet, could announce one day that it already possesses several nuclear bombs — and that there is nothing anyone can do about it. Will the world then be forced to live with a nuclear-armed theocracy that sponsors terrorism, oppresses its people, and seeks to export its ideology across the region? That does not sound like a cheery future to accept.

Iran has already stepped up executing its citizens. In just eight months, according to the National Council of Resistance of Iran, “Among those executed were five political prisoners and three women…. brings the total number of executions under Pezeshkian’s term, which began in August 2024, to 995.”

The only viable path forward is to destroy Iran’s nuclear and missile programs — completely and without delay. Precision airstrikes, sabotage operations, cyberattacks — whatever it takes. The cost of inaction is far greater than the cost of confrontation. The Islamic Republic has demonstrated that it cannot be trusted to negotiate in good faith. It has lied, manipulated and deceived at every turn. Hoping for a different outcome, unfortunately, is self-deceptive make-believe.

Negotiations only serve to give Iran what it wants: time and space to complete its nuclear project. Axios reported on April 10 that “sources said the Iranians think reaching a complex and highly technical nuclear deal in two months is unrealistic and they want to get more time on the clock to avoid an escalation.”

After watching what happened to Libya after it gave up its nuclear weapons program, and to Ukraine when it gave up its warheads. Iran’s regime could hardly have any intention of abandoning their quest for the bomb. Diplomacy will not stop them. Appeasement will not deter them. The only solution, sadly, seems to be force. If the US and Israel fail to act now, we will soon be facing a world where the Islamic Republic of Iran has crossed the nuclear threshold and commands its bombs. Then what?

Dr. Majid Rafizadeh, is a political scientist, Harvard-educated analyst, and board member of Harvard International Review. He has authored several books on the US foreign policy. He can be reached at dr.rafizadeh@post.harvard.edu