TEHRAN – In an opinion article on March 17, Hill wrote that Donald Trump’s approach to Iran “suffers from fundamental contradictions.”
The revelation of the letter to the Iranian leader before Trump reached Tehran highlights the enforceable nature of Trump’s diplomacy.
Trump told the Fox Project on March 7 that he sent a letter to Iran while it was delivered to Iran by UAE diplomat Anwar Ghagash on March 12.
The Washington-based digital media company said Trump’s approach “vibrates between the vague promises of threats and negotiations.”
Below is the text of the letter.
For obvious reasons, in a fiercely fascinating tale of US-Iran relations, the claim that President Trump sent a letter to Iranian leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei is the latest twist in the long-term drama. Trump’s announcement during a business interview with Fox was characteristically rude.
“I wrote them a letter saying I hope you will negotiate,” he said.
The president’s remarks were accompanied by a combination of his trademark threat and vague promises, which made the observers wonder if this was a real diplomatic overture or simply a different political theatre. Trump said, “I wrote them a letter, I hope you will negotiate.”
Media reports alleged that the letter had not been “written” sent, but Iranian government officials have completely denied receiving such a communication. This episode highlights the nature of Trump’s diplomatic performance. There, epic gestures often precede it.
This is not the first time a US president has attempted to directly outreach Iranian leaders. In a more serious diplomacy effort, Barack Obama sent two letters to Ayatollah Khamenei. Even Trump relied on intermediaries such as former Japanese Prime Minister Abe, who in 2019 sent a message to Tehran to reject it completely.
The leader’s refusal reflects the fact that Trump’s unilateral withdrawal from the Obama administration’s Iran nuclear deal (a joint comprehensive action plan for 2018) has grown since his unilateral withdrawal, dismantling years of multilateral negotiations and re-equipped with crippling sanctions in Iran. The timing of Trump’s claims about the letter is remarkable. Trump’s approach also suffers from fundamental contradictions. On the same day he spoke about his desire for negotiations, the Treasury Scott Bescent even promised stricter economic restrictions on Iran.
Speaking at the New York Economic Club, Bescent vowed that the Second Trump administration would “close Iran’s oil sector and shut down drone manufacturing capabilities,” and would further cut off access to the country’s international financial system.
This contradiction – the offer of dialogue alongside the threat of an escalated economic war – only further strengthens Iran’s skepticism about any overture from Washington. Iranians are very clear that they will not negotiate while under pressure. Ayatollah Khamenei often calls consultations with the United States “unwise, unintentional, disgraceful,” which coincides with the cultural nature of Iranians raised to doubt the West.
From the 1953 CIA-sponsored coup that reverted the Shah to sanctions, Tehran only wants to take Washington, not viewing it as anything other than a country that doesn’t intend to give it in return.
Trump has always had a combination of threats and compromises regarding Iran. He claims he has a major interest in preventing Iran from acquiring what is called nuclear weapons, but suggests that his actions are something different. After abandoning the nuclear deal, Trump, an agreement to place Iran’s most stringent nuclear materials surveillance program, effectively pulled away the mechanisms to ensure Iran’s compliance. Instead, his administration adopted the maximum pressure policy of guiding Iran to abandon its missile programme and reducing ties with regional authority such as Hezbollah and the Houtis.
Publicizing a letter before it reaches the intended recipient is an extraordinary diplomatic move, and what analysts suggest is more about optics than real diplomacy. If Trump was serious about negotiations, he is not boasting that he would simultaneously threaten military action or crippling sanctions. Iran has overcome years of economic isolation, but it is unlikely to be influenced by media theatres.
Furthermore, there is no clear evidence that Trump’s military threats carry much weight. National attacks on Iran’s nuclear facilities are extremely difficult due to the fact that the country is expanding its nuclear facilities. Such actions will inevitably lead to a fierce response from Iran, further escalating regional and subsequent conflicts. While risk is far higher than potential benefits, Trump continues to exercise the threat of power as a rhetorical tool.
The broader context of US-Iran relations suggests that Trump’s latest manipulation is unlikely to have any consequences. Washington’s withdrawal from nuclear deal not only alienated Iran, but also destroyed Western unity on the issue. European signatories initially tried to save the deal, but eventually began to impose their own restrictions on Tehran, contributing to its slow end.
In response, Iran began rolling back its own commitment in 2020. Meanwhile, Iranian leaders remain rebellious. Foreign Minister Abbas Arakchi emphasizes that Tehran will not rely on US involvement to resolve economic challenges. Instead, he argued that Iran should focus on strengthening its domestic economy and promoting relations with non-Western forces.
Trump has yet to demonstrate a consistent strategy for dealing with Iran due to his all-self-style trading ability. His approach vibrates between threats and vague negotiation promises, whilst deepening Iran’s economic and military solutions. If his goal is to prevent Iran from moving forward with its nuclear program, his policies have so far achieved the opposition. By dismantling Iran’s nuclear deal, he removed the restrictions on Iran’s uranium enrichment.
By imposing severe sanctions, he strengthened Tehran hardliners who argued that his involvement with Washington was useless. Iran’s response to Trump’s letter, whether real or imagined, reflects a broader trend in its foreign policy. The Islamic Republic has long considered negotiations with the US as a trap. This is a way for Washington to draw concessions without providing meaningful guarantees. This perception has only been strengthened during the Trump era, with officials on Iran’s political spectrum expressing deep skepticism about any overture from Washington.
Reality remains the same as Trump continues to cheat on his new discussion ideas. Meaningful diplomacy requires trust, consistency and willingness to compromise.