Washington: Despite a US-Iran memorandum that opened a 60-day diplomatic window, missile exchanges and maritime threats suggest the negotiations are faltering under growing military pressure.
According to Radio Free Europe Radio Liberty, Hudson Institute Senior Fellow Mary Kissel discussed whether diplomacy can still deliver lasting security, emphasizing that Iran's nuclear ambitions remain the central issue. Kissel noted that the current military developments are consistent with Iran's historical behavior, suggesting that the regime continues to test boundaries until met with opposition.
Kissel raised critical questions about the purpose of diplomacy, questioning whether it serves merely as a dialogue or as a means to achieve strategic objectives. She highlighted the United States' clear strategic goal of preventing Iran, a regime that has caused numerous casualties, from acquiring nuclear weapons. Drawing parallels with past threats posed by Iran, she expressed skepticism about Tehran's trustworthiness and suggested that the US might need to reconsider its approach if diplomatic commitments are not honored.
The situation in the Strait of Hormuz remains tense, with commercial shipping below normal levels amid threats and mine concerns. Kissel suggested that Iran might be using military pressure to gain political leverage over this critical waterway. However, she believes that the energy markets indicate Iran's influence may not endure, citing falling oil prices and alternative energy sources as evidence.
Kissel warned against allowing Iran to shift focus away from its nuclear program, emphasizing that the international community cannot afford to let maritime issues overshadow broader security concerns. She also addressed the geopolitical dynamics involving a Russia-China-Iran axis opposing the US and its allies, framing the situation as a contest between competing worldviews.
As Secretary of State and acting national-security adviser Marco Rubio concluded his Gulf trip, Kissel observed that the US is drawing firmer red lines regarding the Strait of Hormuz. However, she acknowledged the lack of clarity about decision-making within Tehran and the potential for back-channel communications. Kissel stressed that diplomacy alone cannot provide security guarantees without a definitive victory, urging Gulf states to collaborate with the West in securing maritime transit.
Kissel also addressed the dual tracks of diplomacy and military pressure, highlighting President Trump's readiness to use force against Iran. She pointed to recent military actions as evidence of the administration's willingness to respond robustly to threats.
Looking ahead, Kissel identified several critical factors to watch, including the US's commitment to dismantling Iran's nuclear program, Washington's tolerance for Iranian aggression, and the implications of oil prices and insurance markets on Iran's leverage. Additionally, she underscored the importance of supporting the Iranian people, who remain the regime's primary victims.
Finally, Kissel outlined potential outcomes for the region, ranging from a free and democratic Iran to fragmentation or military control. She concluded by reiterating that a radical regime cannot be allowed to possess nuclear weapons, as it poses a threat to regional stability and global security.