Is Trump reading Iran’s intentions correctly? – opinion

Without a fundamental shift in Iran’s policy, the United States will struggle to advance lasting Arab-Israeli peace.

By Mardo Soghom, Middle East Forum

In a remarkable statement, former Iranian president Hassan Rouhani said that although regime decision-makers showed signs of moderation after Israel’s June air campaign, that attitude has disappeared.

“After the war, there was a refreshing breeze in the air, but it suddenly died down. Now they believe the next war won’t come so soon, so they’ve reverted to their old misbehaviors,” Rouhani said on October 14, 2025.

Until a week ago, Tehran’s media echoed fears that Israel—and possibly the United States—might strike again if Iran failed to offer concessions.

That mood shifted in the second week of October when Iranian outlets quoted Russian President Vladimir Putin as saying Israel had informed Moscow it would not launch another attack.

Following this, President Donald Trump, visiting the Middle East, emphasized in his Knesset speech that Tehran is weak and a deal will be possible.

“I’m telling you, they wanna make a deal. That’s all I do in my life. I make deals. I’m good at it. I’ve always been good at it. And I know when they want” to make a deal, even if they say otherwise, Trump said.

Trump brushed off concerns that Iran might rebuild its nuclear sites destroyed in June.

“Someone told me: Sir, they are starting their nuclear program again. I said to him: Listen carefully. They are not starting anything. They want to survive.”

This led to more statements by the regime’s so-called reformist wing, led by Rouhani, urging negotiations with the United States.

It was in this context that the former president referred to a softer mood in the aftermath of the Israeli attack, replaced recently by a more hardline posture.

Trump’s tone alarmed some in Israel. Israel Hayom wrote: “It is clear that Trump is aiming for an agreement with Iran, contrary to the Israeli position. … [I]t can be assumed that efforts to renew negotiations between the parties will resume in the near future.”

Despite this, Tehran shows little willingness to make the nuclear or other concessions Washington demands.

Even former foreign minister Javad Zarif, who advocates for direct talks, echoes the grandiose rhetoric of Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei.

Speaking to Al-Nahar in Beirut, Zarif said: “In the twelve-day war, Iran demonstrated that it is the only country with both the courage and the capability to strike Israel. The evacuation of American bases before Iran’s response, and Trump’s message of accepting that response, amounted to his acknowledgment of Iran’s will and power—even in the face of the United States.”

Rouhani, while urging talks, also insisted on October 14 that the Islamic Republic could avoid both war and what he called “surrender.”

His words mirror Khamenei’s formula of “no war and no peace.” For regime insiders, negotiations serve mainly to buy time and ease pressure, not to resolve long-standing disputes or pursue genuine conflict resolution.

Without a fundamental shift in Iran’s policy, the United States will struggle to advance lasting Arab-Israeli peace.

Former Iranian diplomat Nosratollah Tajik warned in Tehran media that without Iran’s involvement, any Gaza settlement will remain fragile.

Yet Khamenei continues to deny Israel’s right to exist, and Iranian officials routinely call for its destruction.

A prominent Iranian analyst abroad said this week that Trump knows the word peace “equals death” for Khamenei. But does he really know that?

Yes, Khamenei wants survival, as Trump said, but that works both ways. Setting his ideology aside means another sort of death for Khamenei.

Daily statements by Iranian officials show the common errors by Western politicians in assessing Tehran’s intentions over the past four decades.

For the Islamic Republic, negotiations and agreements are temporary maneuvers, not signals of a fundamental policy shift toward the United States, Israel, or the region.