White House chief of staff Donald Trump is preparing for crucial peace negotiations with Iran next week. As the country’s most senior military commander, he will be responsible for curtailing Tehran’s nuclear ambitions. Talks come during an ephemeral truce between Israel and Iran, one that appears to be holding for the moment. Big questions still need to be addressed about the alleged damage done to Iranian nuclear sites due to recent US air strikes.
Israel pushes back against preliminary findings leaked in the US. Damage assessments released by the Department of Defense indicate that damage from the strikes is less extensive than what Trump is asserting. During his presidency, Trump regularly lambasted news organizations for what he called “fake news.” This accusation followed closely on the heels of his failing to substantiate assertions that Iranian nuclear facilities were being successfully obliterated.
Uncertainty Surrounding Damage Assessment
To this day, whether the US air strikes would have had the intended effectiveness on Iran’s nuclear facilities is a hotly debated issue. Trump has gone on to claim that these strikes accomplished near mythical destruction, but there are indications that the reality is more complicated.
John Ratcliffe, former Director of National Intelligence, stated, “This includes new intelligence from a historically reliable and accurate source/method that several key Iranian nuclear facilities were destroyed and would have to be rebuilt over the course of years.” This assertion supports Trump’s narrative of significant damage. Daryl Kimball, Executive Director of the Arms Control Association, argues that the strikes did not severely hinder Iran’s nuclear capabilities.
Israel’s military chief of staff, Eyal Zamir, expressed confidence in the effectiveness of the strikes, claiming that the Iranian nuclear program “suffered a harsh, broad and deep blow and has been set back years.” Whatever change course Israel takes, it will still be primarily focused on countering Iran’s advances toward a nuclear capability. This position new complicates the already fraught debate.
Guiding this confusion has been the official response at the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). Rafael Mariano Grossi, the Director of the IAEA said it was imperative that inspectors have access to check stockpiles of highly enriched uranium. He noted, “It is urgent that the Agency be allowed to resume its mission in Iran.” Until such inspections are able to take place, the full extent of damage caused by US strikes is impossible to ascertain.
Legislative Actions and Diplomatic Challenges
Iran’s majlis (parliament) just last week adopted a bill to halt various inspections by the IAEA. Under the new law, any future inspections must be approved by the Supreme National Security Council. Furthermore, these inspections need approval from Iran’s Guardian Council in order to implement. This legislative development should be more fully transparent about Iran’s ongoing nuclear program and its violations of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action and other global agreements.
Trump’s upcoming talks with Iran may hinge on navigating these legislative hurdles while addressing Tehran’s insistence on maintaining its nuclear program. Yet for all the tensions, Iran has shown no desire to concede its goals.
French President Emmanuel Macron, for one, stressed how critical the IAEA’s role will be in providing ongoing visibility into Iran’s nuclear activities. He stated, “France stands firmly alongside the IAEA, whose role is vital for nuclear safety and security.” Macron’s words serve to emphasize the international community’s alarm over Iran’s nuclear ambitions and the threat they pose to both Israel and broader regional stability.
The Road Ahead: Negotiations and Diplomatic Engagement
Trump seems to be preparing to negotiate with high-level Iranian officials. Second, he must confront the highly politicized and confusing narratives around just how effective our US military actions have been. The talks should be focused on stopping Tehran’s nuclear ambitions and ensuring security needs of both sides are met.
At the same time, Trump has taken a belligerent attitude toward all stories critical of US strikes against Iran. He remarked, “After 36 hours of dangerously flying through Enemy Territory, they landed. They knew the Success was LEGENDARY, and then, two days later, they started reading Fake News by CNN and The Failing New York Times.” The statement signals deep personal frustration over militarily successful actions being mischaracterized.
Next week’s talks could very well set the tone for future US-Iran relations. They might even change Middle East geopolitics more profoundly. The stakes could not be higher — the prospect of a return to open warfare looms large if talks should fail.
