Iran talks without force risk repeat of past failures

The world is focused on a single question: will President Donald Trump strike Iran, or will he once again attempt negotiations - and if force is used, what form will it take and what role Israel will play? Recent tweets, media leaks, and comments attributed to “close sources” have raised concern that confrontational rhetoric may be giving way to the language of talks. That would be a grave mistake. Cutting a deal with this regime would be nothing less than geopolitical malpractice. Following the joint Israeli-American campaign that significantly degraded Iran’s nuclear infrastructure, ballistic missile forces, drone capabilities and more assets that the regime has already begun to rebuild - there can be only one legitimate objective for any future negotiations, should the United States mistakenly choose to enter them: the complete dismantlement of all remaining and reconstructed capabilities. There are no more illusions, and no room for diplomatic games designed to buy time. Any agreement that provides sanctions relief or financial windfalls would simply allow Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei and the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps to pocket the cash, wait out President Trump, rebuild their terror networks, expand their missile arsenal, and sprint toward a nuclear weapon after 2028. Such an outcome would not only endanger US allies and American forces - it would also represent a betrayal of millions of Iranians who despise the regime, and of the tens of thousands murdered by it in recent years. After the 12-day war and prior to the activation of the UN “snapback” sanctions mechanism, signals of a possible return to talks began circulating, largely through statements by President Trump’s special envoy, Steve Witkoff. Under no circumstances should Washington return to the failed negotiating frameworks of the past. As President Trump himself has stated clearly, “The old deals and proposals are not on the table.” If negotiations are resumed despite the risks, they must be the first and the last round under a fundamentally new approach, one derived from the lessons of war, not the naiveté of prior diplomacy. For decades, negotiations have served the Iranian regime well. Tehran perfected the art of extracting concessions, delaying enforcement, and emerging from talks stronger than before. The US ultimatum for Iran President Trump has repeatedly articulated a clear ultimatum: accept US terms in full - or face the consequences. That ultimatum must be enforced, not diluted. Therefore, before any negotiations are contemplated, even with Iran agreeing to the preconditions mentioned, the United States should act militarily to change the strategic reality on the ground, and to send a clear message to the Iranian people. Specifically, Washington must strike now to eliminate Iran’s long-range ballistic missile program - the primary delivery system for a future nuclear weapon, and to severely degrade the regime’s internal apparatus of repression, including the IRGC and its intelligence and security services. Doing so would both restore deterrence and signal to the Iranian people that American promises of support are real. Even before the war, and certainly now, we warned that negotiations without strict preconditions and real, irreversible actions would be dangerous. Today, after widespread protests across Iran and the regime’s brutal repression - marked by mass killings, executions, and imprisonment, this warning is even more urgent. Tehran has consistently used diplomacy as cover to consolidate power at home while exporting violence abroad. Now that Iran’s capabilities have been severely damaged, even if not fully destroyed, the threshold for talks must be far higher than ever before. Negotiations should not begin until Iran has already met concrete, verifiable demands. President Trump put it bluntly when he said Iran would be “foolish” to insist on uranium enrichment. I add: foolish to continue producing long-range ballistic missiles that threaten US allies and American forces, and to persist in supporting terrorism through regional proxies. The United States must uphold the president’s promise to the Iranian people that “help is on its way.” We have seen this movie before. Under the Obama administration, Iran used diplomacy to preserve and legitimize its nuclear program. Without President Trump’s withdrawal from the JCPOA in 2018, and without the military achievements of the recent war - Iran would today be at, or even beyond, the nuclear weapons threshold. Israel wants zero uranium enrichment Israel’s position has always been unequivocal: zero uranium enrichment, zero heavy-water reactors capable of producing plutonium, and zero fissile material on Iranian soil. Before the nuclear deal, Iran was required to comply with multiple UN Security Council resolutions mandating the dismantlement of all nuclear facilities, removal of all enriched material, a halt to weapons development disguised as academic...

Iran talks without force risk repeat of past failures

Continue Reading on The Jerusalem Post

How do you feel about this article?

📝 Article Information

Author

Original Publisher

Published Date

Disclaimer

Iran talks without force risk repeat of past failures

Continue Reading on The Jerusalem Post

How do you feel about this article?

📝 Article Information

Author

Original Publisher

Published Date

Disclaimer

More from The Jerusalem Post