Tehran -Since he was appointed in January 2025, President Donald Trump has almost gained provocative or Hawkish comments on Iran, and some of his actions have been seen as a potential step in diplomacy. I am.
However, in consideration of his past transactions with the assembled teams and Iran, it is likely that both countries will have a smooth four years unless the president shifts his approach to both the United States and Iran. It doesn’t seem to be.
In his first term, Trump’s approach to the Iranian Republic of Iran was characterized by considerable tensions, such as withdrawing from Iranian nuclear trading, aggressive sanctions, and escalating rhetoric. At present, his second phase has high interests and strategic landscapes are more complicated.
Some of the Trump cabinets seem to be practical and realistic about the policies of Iran, which are potential, in Western Asia, but his second administration, Secretary Marco Rubio, and the Ministry of Finance Scott Bessent. Includes Michael Waltz, a secretary and national security advisor. Even Hawkish, Iran’s stance. Their views deeply rooted in long -standing political ideology and personal experience converge to create a consistent but hard policy for Tehran.
Next, let’s examine the individual perspectives of these influential people, including Trump itself, and a wider context that forms their policies.
Trump attitude toward Iran from 2017 to 2021
President Donald Trump’s approach to Iran is characterized by conflicted rhetoric and action. Earlier in his first term, he unilaterally withdrawn the United States in 2018 from a collaborative action plan (JCPOA), also known as Iranian nuclear trading. It was too tolerant of Iran and could not deal with national ballistic missile programs and local instability activities.
In May 2018, Trump built a promise by pulling out the United States from JCPOA and marked one of his most important foreign policy movements.
The withdrawal has launched a “maximum pressure” campaign for economic and diplomatic isral through sanctions.
In addition to sanctions, Trump has labeled Iran’s elite military power, Islamic Revolutionary Guard (IRGC), as a terrorist organization. This is a very provocative movement that has already added fuel to a nervous relationship.
Fast forward to Trump’s second phase, there is a remarkable change in his rhetoric. The hardline approach is the basis of his Iran’s policy, but his statement has begun to soften. In early 2025, when Trump entered the final stretch of the president’s position, he expressed his willingness to negotiate with Iran, although under severe conditions.
“Iran has to come to the table, but this time the negotiations will be better for the United States and our allies,” Trump declared in January 2025. The missile development program will be stopped and the area will be stopped, especially in Syria and Yemen.
This change in this tone reflects a wider strategy that aims to fuse economic pressure and diplomatic outreach. Trump’s advisor pointed out the serious economic crisis of Iran, which had worsened by sanctions, as the reason Tehran would increase the openness of the dialogue.
Trump’s rhetoric is somewhat softer, but it is clear that it focuses on maintaining pressure. “Sanctions will continue,” said Trump repeatedly at a press conference during his first term. “Iran has to understand that their actions have results.”
Marco Rubio: Secretary of State and Iran
Marco Rubio, a many years of Republican Republican Senator from Florida, was nominated by Trump in 2024 as Secretary of State. Rubio, a solid opponent of Iranian nuclear trading, was a policy defender aimed at containing Iran’s nuclear plan and reducing its influence in West Asia. Rubio calls for the suspicions of “terrorism”, “human rights abuse”, and “regional conflicts” to re -impose severe sanctions released under JCPOA.
In the confirmation of the Secretary of State, Rubio reconfirmed his commitment to strict policies against Iran and emphasized that the United States would not return to nuclear trading. He criticized the transaction as “Iran’s path to nuclear weapons” and promised to cooperate with allies to strengthen sanctions and strengthen execution. Rubio’s comment was consistent with his previous position. This has been consistent with Iran as a major threat to both the US and the world’s security.
Revio’s rhetoric emphasizes his concerns about the growing influence of Iran in West Asia. He consistently oppose Iran that Iran was involved in Syria, Yemen and Iraq, which supports the resistance group. Rubio has emphasized the need to support opposition groups in cooperation with local allies, including Israel and Saudi Arabia, against the influence of Iran in countries like Syria.
“Iran cannot increase the effects of malignant in the Middle East. We must stand with allies, including Israel, so that Iran’s unstable activities are not checked,” said Rubio. Ta.
Rubio’s approach indicates that Trump’s aggressive attitude toward Iran, but focuses on regional partnerships and diplomacy in Tehran. Rubio has stated his willingness to be involved in diplomatic if he meets certain conditions, but has stuck on his belief that it must maintain its strength.
Michael Waltz: National Security Advisor and Iran
Former Green Beret from Florida, Michael Waltz, a member of the House of Representatives, was appointed a national security advisor from Trump. Waltz’s view of Iran is formed by his wide military background and his experience in West Asia. As a military retirement, Waltz emphasizes the importance of confronting what he calls the ambitions of Iranian regions.
In various interviews, Waltz has expressed concern about Iran’s relationship with the resistance of countries such as Iraq, Syria, and Lebanon. He describes Iran’s activities as “instability” and proposes more powerful US response to counter these threats.
During his confirmation hearing, Waltz emphasized the importance of facing Iran through combination of military deterrence, sanctions, and diplomatic efforts. He also announced that the United States did not allow Iranian efforts to expand nuclear planning. “We need to oppose Iran’s unstable activities in the area and never get nuclear weapons,” Waltz said.
His hard -line attitude toward Iran’s experience in the army and his hard -line attitude toward Iranian regional activities, he became an important supporter to maintain a robust US military in Western Asia. He has expressed his support for continuous military operations aimed at hindering the scaffolding of Iran in countries such as Syria and Iraq.
Scott Bessent: The Ministry of Finance and Iran’s secretary
Scott Bessent, an investor with hedge fund and private equity, was appointed Secretary of Finance by Trump in 2024. Rubio, and Waltz. As a Finance Secretary, Bessent’s role is important in implementing economic sanctions on Iran and guaranteeing that US financial institutions are not involved in the Iranian government.
Vessent has long supported the “maximum pressure” campaign for Iran and has proposed the use of economic sanctions as a major tool to weaken the Republic of Islam. He argued that when sanctions were effectively executed, they could forcibly inconvene Iranian economy and abandon nuclear plan and regional alliance.
“Iran is a great threat, and the best way to deal with it is to break the administration again,” Bessent said in an interview in 2024. His emphasis on economic pressure reflects the belief of sanctions to change Tehran’s behavior without relying on military intervention. Bessent is a critic of voice in sanctions in the Obama era due to Iranian nuclear trading, and he supports sanctions in sanctions in the main departments of Iranian economy, including oil and gas.
As a Finance Secretary, Bessent can play a very important role in forming a US strategy for Iran, and uses economic leverage to put pressure on Tehran and its allies.
The views of Donald Trump and his main members of the Cabinet show a unified, hard -rigid attitude toward Iran. These numbers share the belief that Iran has a great threat to both the security of both regions and the world, and continue to continue the “maximum pressure” strategy that began during the first term of Trump. Is proposed.
This approach offers a challenging landscape for diplomatic involvement with Iran. These policies can strengthen US leverage in a specific field, but there is also a serious risk, such as escalating tensions and more widespread regional disputes. Eventually, the future of the United States and Iran, which is based on the administration, depends on how the United States can effectively manage these aggressive tactics, take up diplomatic solutions and explore in pressure. Masu.
What happens to Trump
Although President Trump has not yet determined his policy against Iran in the second term, most analysts may maintain or strengthen the “maximum pressure” campaign he started between the first presidential position. I expect it to be expensive. A strategy continued by President Biden from 2021 to 2025. But these analysts warn that continuing this approach is one of the worst decision he can do.
As Iran’s Foreign Minister Abbass Araguchi recently said, “maximum pressure only brings the maximum defeat.” Updating such a campaign may promote another cycle of failure.
The “maximum pressure” strategy has seriously influenced Iran’s economy, but the impact has contrary to Trump’s intended target. Trump argued that JCPOA did not suppress Iran’s nuclear plan. Now, with the agreement on confusion, Iran has made the most important progress in the nuclear industry in decades. Further pressure has definitely damaged Iran, but probably only drives the country to further nuclear ambitions. If economic pressure loses its effectiveness and the United States is forced to threaten military behavior, Tehran may redefine its nuclear doctrine and ultimately pursue nuclear weapons development.
Considering all of these, Trump needs to choose a path to an infinite catastrophe or a relatively calm road.