While diplomatic language was the American language of dealing with the Iranian regime in the era of President Barack Obama, which led (to reaching the Iranian nuclear agreement), this diplomatic language gave Iran an opportunity to employ pressure papers that it possesses, and thus it speaks from a position of strength and produced an agreement badly based on American concessions that served the Iranian regional project, when the Barack Obama administration sought to separate the nuclear issue from the regional issue, and launched the Iranian arm in the region.
Under President Donald Trump, his strategy caused an important shift in the American language towards Iran. It sought to give priority to the language of military escalation, to move the military option from an option that has been on the table for many years to the military build-up on the ground, and to target the leaders of the Iranian project, such as Qassem Soleimani. There is no doubt that this American move greatly weakened Iran and made it lose many pressure cards that it could have sought to use in any upcoming negotiation process regarding the nuclear issue.
However, the features of the strategy of the administration of President Joe Biden, has indications based on a strong decline in the issue of military language, which began with “the departure of the American aircraft carrier USS Nimitz from the Gulf after 9 months of deployment” and Joe Biden’s announcement to stop supporting military operations in Yemen. It seems that through these steps Washington wants to establish a new phase based on flexibility and on strengthening the diplomatic language in dealing with Iran, thus reducing the escalation towards Iran, which was the main feature during the era of former President Donald Trump.
The accelerated steps taken by Joe Biden administration in seeking appeasement with Iran, is a tampering with the gains achieved during the Trump years. It is an indication that we may be standing on the threshold of (a bad nuclear agreement, as is the agreement of Barack Obama’s era), whereas Trump’s escalation strategy could have led to pushing for an agreement in which Iran would negotiate out of weakness, forcing it to surrender and make many concessions, but this breakthrough in the event of the return of the language of diplomatic tools and the decline of the star of the language of military tools will make the matter different, as it may give Iran the opportunity to re-strengthen its influence in the region, after a receding phase, and allow it to find pressure means that would enable it to negotiate from a position of strength.
