Trump must not fall for Iran's nuclear shell game
Team Trump has a growing Iranian problem. Tehran's latest purported nuclear offer — a farcical proposal to pause uranium enrichment for a year in exchange for the release of Iranian frozen funds and Washington's recognition of Iran's right to enrich uranium for civilian and energy purposes — is an obvious strategic non-starter for both the U.S. and Israel.
As Freedom for the Defense of Democracies President Mark Dubowitz posted on X, 'Do [the Iranians] think we're that stupid?' Apparently so.
Despite President Trump's assertion that talks between Iran and the U.S. might produce 'good news' this week, it is clear Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei is intent on playing him for the fool.
Iran has been allowed to play this dangerous nuclear shell game for far too long. It has proven repeatedly that it cannot be trusted, and Israel is done playing Iranian games.
The White House must forcefully push back and disabuse Tehran of the notion that Trump can be played or that a slightly revised present-day rehash of the ill-advised Obama-era nuclear deal with Iran is even remotely acceptable.
Iran's strategic objective is apparent. Tehran is hell-bent on retaining its uranium enrichment capacity — a rapidly growing capacity that we have repeatedly warned would permit Iran to immediately produce five nuclear weapons within one week and exponentially many more nukes thereafter given Tehran's substantial centrifuge capacity to spin 90 percent weapons-grade highly enriched uranium.
Yet Iran's nuclear shell game is becoming even darker. It is no longer simply the ultimate manifestation of Iran's 'Axis of Resistance' war against Israel. Rather, it is now also Tehran's key staying card in Russian President Vladimir Putin's 'Axis of Evil.'
To preserve its status in both — especially given Iran's growing strategic standing with Putin as a primary supplier in his 'Arsenals of Evil' — Tehran is desperate to find ways to buy time to thwart any U.S. or Israeli military strikes against its nuclear weapons program.
Enter Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian. His two-day state visit to Muscat, Oman earlier this week was a multifaceted attempt to do just that.
Accompanied by Abbas Araghchi, Iran's foreign minister, Pezeshkian met with Haitham bin Tariq Al Said, the Sultan of Oman, ahead of a proposed sixth round of nuclear negotiations between Washington and Tehran.
Pezeshkian's regional Middle East gambit is to persuade Oman — who is serving as a negotiating mediator between the U.S. and Iran (and negotiated the U.S.-Houthi rebel ceasefire) — to sanction Iran's proposal to freeze uranium enrichment in exchange for sanctions relief and U.S. recognition of Tehran's right to enrich uranium going forward.
One of Pezeshkian's main regional goals is to obfuscate the issue of uranium enrichment. Earlier, in mid-May, in the lead up to his state visit to Oman, Tehran proposed that Iran, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Qatar and other interested countries in the Persian Gulf region form a nuclear consortium to enrich uranium for commercial purposes.
Uranium enriched at levels below 5 percent — the amount required for hospital equipment and medical experiments — would be produced under the supervision of Iranian engineers. Iran's goal is obvious — to obtain the backing and support of fellow Gulf States.
Although their interests in procuring low-enriched uranium are legitimate, the Sunni Arab Gulf states are not likely to sign on to Tehran's proposal. First, it would put Doha, Dubai and Riyadh in direct conflict with Washington's zero-enrichment negotiating position. Second, it would potentially put them in Israel's crosshairs, should any Iranian-controlled production facilities be physically located in their countries.
Intentionally or no, Israel sent a message to Iran and the Gulf States during Pezeshkian's visit that it was a bad idea when it again struck Houthi targets in Yemen — Oman's neighbor in southwest Arabia. To underscore the point, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu forcefully declared that 'Iran is responsible' for aggression against Israel from Yemen.
Notably, there was an even darker transregional element to Pezeshkian's meetings in Oman. While he was meeting with the Sultan, Iran was also slated to participate in an 'Axis of Evil' military summit being hosted in Moscow by Sergei Shoigu, the former Russian defense minister. Military and security officials from North Korea and Iran were in attendance. Disconcertingly, the United Arab Emirates was in attendance as well.
That meeting in Moscow is a timely reminder that Russia has a vested interest in disrupting any nuclear negotiations between Washington and Iran. It is also working to deter any U.S. military action against Tehran and its nuclear, ballistic missile or drone production facilities spread out throughout the country.
Khamenei, presently, is a key supplier of ballistic missiles and drones to Moscow – the importance of which was recently underscored when Iran's parliament recently approved a 20-year strategic partnership with Moscow. Iran is doing its best to leverage its relationship with Putin to safeguard its nuclear ambitions. They are connected in that Trump's Special Envoy Steven Witkoff is negotiating this and the Russian ceasefire deal in Ukraine.
That pact, notably, comes on top of a free trade agreement that went into effect in mid-May under the auspices of the Eurasian Economic Union.
Israel sees all of this for what it is: a highly dangerous nuclear shell game being played against Jerusalem and Washington by Tehran and Russia. Significantly, it is equally clear that Israel is likely nearing a military strike on Iran's nuclear weapons program as evidenced by Trump's acknowledgement on Wednesday that he asked Netanyahu to wait.
The Israeli prime minister is short on patience with Iran these days given its support for Hamas, Hezbollah and the Houthi rebels.
It is time Team Trump saw this the same way and with the same level of clarity. Tehran, like its Russian ally, is attempting to play him for a fool. The White House needs to send a clear message to Khamenei, Oman, the United Arab Emirates and by extension Putin and his 'Axis of Evil' allies, including China, that Washington is nobody's fool.
Mark Toth writes on national security and foreign policy. Col. (Ret.) Jonathan E. Sweet served 30 years as an Army intelligence officer.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hill
22 minutes ago
- The Hill
Israel recovers bodies of three hostages from Gaza
Israel announced on Sunday that it recovered the remains of three hostages from Gaza and that their bodies had been returned to Israel. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu identified the three individuals as Yonatan Samerano, Shai Levinson and Ofra Kedar, saying they were 'murdered and taken hostage' during the Oct. 7, 2023, attacks by Hamas and taken hostage into Gaza. 'Together with all citizens of Israel, my wife and I convey our heartfelt condolences to the dear families, and share in their deep sorrow,' Netanyahu said. 'I thank the commander and our fighters for the successful action, their determination and their courage,' he continued. Netanyahu said Israel is continuing its effort to bring home the hostages — even as it has opened a new front with its war with Iran, with which Israel has been exchanging strikes for more than a week. The statement came shortly after President Trump announced that the U.S. bombed three Iranian nuclear sites. 'The campaign to return the hostages is ongoing and is continuing in parallel to our campaign against Iran,' Netanyahu said. 'We will not rest until we return home all of our hostages, the living and the deceased.'
The Hill
27 minutes ago
- The Hill
Netanyahu praises Trump Iran strikes: ‘Peace through strength'
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu thanked President Trump on Saturday for directing U.S. strikes on Iranian nuclear sites. 'President Trump and I often say, 'Peace through strength.' First comes strength, then comes peace. And tonight, President Trump and the United States acted with a lot of strength,' Netanyahu said in a video on the social platform X. 'President Trump, I thank you. The people of Israel thank you. The forces of civilization thank you. God bless America. God bless Israel. And may God bless our unshakable Alliance our unbreakable faith,' he continued. Trump announced on Saturday evening that the U.S. had bombed three Iranian nuclear sites and said, 'NOW IS THE TIME FOR PEACE!' Netanyahu congratulated Trump for making the 'bold decision to target Iran's nuclear facilities with the awesome and righteous might of the United States,' saying it 'will change history.' Netanyahu touted the efforts Israel has made in its strikes against Iran, adding, 'but in tonight's action against Iran's nuclear facilities, America has been truly unsurpassed.' 'It has done what no other country on Earth could do. History will record: President Trump acted to deny the world's most dangerous regime, the world's most dangerous weapons,' the Israeli leader said. 'His leadership today has created a pivot of history that can help lead the Middle East and beyond to a future of prosperity and peace,' he continued, referring to Trump. The announcement of U.S. action against Iran came two days after the White House said Trump would decide whether to get involved in the conflict between Iran and Israel 'in the next two weeks' to give a window for negotiations. White House sources indicated the U.S. had given Israel a heads up before it struck the Iranian sites and that Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu spoke after the strikes. It marked a significant entrance by the U.S. into a conflict that Israel and Iran had been in for more than a week. It also indicated a shift by Trump, who said he was seeking a diplomatic solution with Iran and sent U.S. officials to make a deal with Tehran on its nuclear program.
Business Insider
42 minutes ago
- Business Insider
NATO ships are at rising risk. Top commanders tell BI it's time to rethink naval defense.
NATO warships are sailing into a dangerous new era of naval warfare in which the threats are growing fast, two senior alliance commanders recently told Business Insider. From the Black Sea to the Red Sea, the conflicts in Ukraine and the Middle East have exposed key vulnerabilities and shown NATO what its naval forces need to operate in risky environments. Dangers to warships these days include threats like hostile drones, missiles, and other naval vessels, capabilities built on rapidly advancing combat technology. So what does NATO need? Layered defenses, cheaper ways to destroy enemy threats, and deeper ammunition stockpiles. Vice Adm. James Morley, the deputy commander of NATO's Joint Force Command Norfolk, told BI that Ukraine and the Red Sea "have revealed the need to be ready to deal with a higher level of intensity than we had previously scaled for, both in terms of stock and in terms of time on the front line." In the Black Sea, Ukrainian forces have repeatedly used domestically produced naval drones to damage and destroy Russian warships, showing the risks that relatively cheap, asymmetric combat solutions pose to conventional naval forces. Far away, at the southern end of the Red Sea, the Iran-backed Houthis in Yemen have launched missiles and drones at merchant vessels and NATO warships defending international shipping lanes. In its efforts to fend off the Houthi attacks, the US Navy has faced its most intense combat since World War II, US officials have previously said. Morley said NATO warships are at a higher risk because of the number of global actors who are prepared to use military force. Weapons proliferation has given actors who might previously have been unable to threaten advanced navies a new ability to do so. In the case of the Houthis, for instance, the group's missile attacks have raised the level of danger in the Red Sea and Gulf of Aden to a level not seen in years. The situation is different in Europe, where NATO warships have not been shot at but tensions are running high. There have been several incidents with Moscow that raise the level of risk. 'The mindset needs to be layered defense' Surface warships face an expanding range of threats, from anti-ship cruise and ballistic missiles and torpedoes to enemy aircraft and drones. Some weapons now in play only recently saw combat for the first time. The high operational tempo in the Red Sea has informed Western military planners about what limitations they face regarding magazine capacity, weapons inventory, and reloading capabilities. Morley said that as the weaponry that can threaten warships increases, so must the defensive capabilities aboard the vessels in danger. It's important to invest in missile stockpiles and ensure that NATO defense industrial bases can produce enough and ships can carry enough should they sail into a fight. The days "of driving around with a silo of ammunition that never gets used is sadly now in the past," he said, explaining that "ships routinely come back from the Red Sea, for example, having expended ammunition, and they need to be resupplied and then get back out on patrol." US Navy warships, for instance, have expended significant quantities of SM-series interceptor missiles for air defense. Air defense isn't just about numbers. It's also about dollars. The rise of inexpensive strike drones — some just tens of thousands of dollars apiece — as a tool of naval warfare has NATO forces trying to figure out how they can cheaply defeat these threats without wasting a surface-to-air missile costing millions. The aim is to bring the cost difference between the threat and the interceptor much closer to parity. "I think the mindset needs to be layered defense," Morley said. Warships need the expensive, higher-end missiles to deal with sophisticated threats. But breaking the cost-curve challenge means having a range of capabilities so complex interceptors aren't expended on the simple threats. American Arleigh Burke-class destroyers, for instance, are kitted with options like the M2 Browning .50 caliber machine guns, Mark 38 turret systems, five-inch artillery cannons, and a variety of surface-to-air missiles. These weapons allow the warships to confront a range of threats, though some options, like the deck guns, come with drawbacks, such as permitting threats to get much closer to warships than desired. Big platforms aren't obsolete Adm. Pierre Vandier, NATO's Supreme Allied Commander Transformation, who oversees alliance modernization efforts, said emerging technologies, like drones, have created new problems for larger platforms like warships, as has been the case in the Black Sea. Anything that exists on the water could effectively be hit. Vandier identified uncrewed systems as one of the biggest changes in naval warfare over the past decade and said one risk is that a warship could be overwhelmed by a swarm of drones. "You need to find ways on the ships to be protected from that and to engage multiple targets at the same time," he said. That could be kinetic, involving a physical strike, or some alternative, like electronic warfare. NATO is working to incorporate lessons learned from Ukraine and the Red Sea into its combat training. At last month's Formidable Shield 25 exercise, US sailors practiced using the deck guns to shoot down small quadcopter drones that they could face in a swarm attack. They also practiced defending against uncrewed surface vehicles like the ones Ukraine has used to batter Russia's Black Sea fleet. Exercises such as Formidable Shield allow allied navies to practice navigating air defense challenges and learn how to engage cheaper threats with cheaper defenses, thus saving the more expensive methods for the higher-end threats. Despite the growing number of threats to warships, Vandier said the rise of drones doesn't necessarily render them obsolete. Aircraft carriers, the flagships of a fleet, can project force globally with embarked aviation. They travel in heavily defended strike groups, making the carriers particularly formidable and hard to reach for enemy attacks. "To get to a carrier, you have layers," Vandier said. "It's a battle between the shield and the sword. My personal feeling is that the story is not finished for the big platforms. Not yet."
