Azernews.Az

AzerNEWS Staff

Read more

Donald Trump’s decision to cancel a planned diplomatic mission to Pakistan after dismissing Iran’s proposals as insufficient is more than a momentary setback. It reveals a deeper truth about US-Iran diplomacy: pressure can create openings, but it rarely creates trust.

According to reports, Trump called off the Islamabad talks after concluding that Tehran’s latest offer failed to meet American expectations. His message was blunt: the United States holds the leverage, and Iran must come back with something better. It is classic Trump negotiating theatre – maximal pressure paired with an open door.

But the collapse of the Pakistan channel also shows why Iran remains so difficult to move through coercion alone.

Tehran has long avoided direct talks with Washington, preferring mediators such as Oman, Qatar or Pakistan. This is partly ideological, partly political. Iranian leaders cannot easily be seen engaging face-to-face with a country they publicly portray as hostile. Indirect diplomacy allows them to negotiate without appearing to surrender.

There is also the reality of Iran’s internal system. Foreign policy does not rest in one pair of hands. The president, the foreign ministry, the Revolutionary Guards and the Supreme Leader all shape decisions. That makes clear, swift concessions difficult. What Washington sees as a delay is often the product of Tehran’s fragmented power structure.

Yet the more striking point is why the United States, despite its military superiority, still seeks talks at all.

If force were truly the preferred option, the Pakistan talks would not have been arranged in the first place. Washington knows that military escalation with Iran would be costly, risky and regionally explosive. Iran can threaten shipping lanes, strike through allied groups, disrupt Gulf energy flows and drag the US into another open-ended Middle East conflict.

Trump understands this, even if he rarely says it plainly. Negotiation is not weakness; it is cheaper than war.

That is why the cancellation should be seen less as the end of diplomacy than as a bargaining tactic. Trump wants Tehran to feel the pressure and return with a more substantial offer. Iran, meanwhile, wants sanctions relief and recognition without appearing to bend.

So the stalemate continues.

For all the rhetoric on both sides, neither Washington nor Tehran truly wants the alternative. America does not want another regional war. Iran does not want deeper isolation or devastating strikes.

The Islamabad talks may have been cancelled, but the logic of negotiation remains intact. In the end, both sides may dislike diplomacy – yet still need it more than conflict.

Photo: VOI.id