Tehran has little reason to trust another US promise, and no intention of surrendering the waterway Washington has failed to secure.
His visit shed light on Tehran’s calculations as US and Israeli leaders campaign on threats of renewed attacks. Those threats carry electoral weight in both countries, but with negotiations stalled, Iran is preparing for Washington and Tel Aviv to act on them.
Campaigning for another war
Ahead of Israel’s 27 October elections, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has made overthrowing the Iranian government a campaign pledge. “I am committed to bringing down the Iranian regime, and I know how to do it,” he said, according to i24NEWS, tying his bid for another term to the pursuit of regime change in Tehran.
On 18 October, he again declared that Israel was prepared to strike Iran without US assistance, saying that bringing down the government in Tehran was a directive he had given to the security establishment.
Netanyahu said he always sought Washington’s agreement, but insisted that Israel’s objectives were not conditional on receiving it. He claimed that most of Israel’s objectives against Iran had been achieved while demanding further action to prevent Tehran from rebuilding its capabilities.
His statements echo those of US President Donald Trump, whose administration faces congressional midterm elections on 3 November.
Trump said Washington was working to prevent Iran from restoring its nuclear capabilities, promising that operations against the country would end “very soon” and gasoline prices would then fall. US Secretary of War Pete Hegseth warned on 17 October that Tehran must abandon its “nuclear ambitions” and reach an agreement or face devastating military action.
Yet Washington has failed to restore normal passage through Hormuz. Iran continues to enforce its restrictions, attacking vessels using routes it has not authorized. Financial Times (FT) figures recorded 24 ships hit in the two weeks to 11 October, compared with 13 during the opening weeks of the war. Brent crude reached $110 a barrel on 16 October, defying Trump’s assurances that cheaper fuel was approaching.
An offer Washington will not accept
Tehran has kept negotiations open while refusing to make concessions before securing an agreement. On 17 October, Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi outlined a seven-day plan, conveyed through Qatar, to reopen Hormuz and restore normal maritime passage once the necessary conditions were met. “The choice now rests with the United States,” he said.
Washington’s response to earlier Iranian proposals had already exposed the distance between the two sides. Trump rejected an Iranian offer on 26 September as “unacceptable,” then dismissed Tehran’s terms again on 1 October, when he raised the possibility of resuming large-scale bombardment after the midterms. Araghchi made clear that Tehran’s offer remained on the table despite Washington’s threats.
The dispute centers on what happens first. Tehran wants an end to the war and the naval blockade before it restores passage through Hormuz, while Washington insists that the nuclear issue form part of the negotiations.
The demands also include lifting oil sanctions and releasing frozen Iranian funds, according to Al-Akhbar. Tehran wants the nuclear negotiations deferred until those steps have been taken. Washington’s insistence on negotiating the nuclear file alongside the conditions for reopening Hormuz has prevented the two sides from agreeing on implementation.
Iran’s refusal to make further concessions also rests on what it considers Washington’s breach of earlier commitments. The two countries signed a memorandum of understanding (MoU) in Islamabad in June, but the subsequent return to US bombing and the naval blockade reinforced Tehran’s distrust. Washington continues to use military threats and economic pressure to secure terms Iran has refused to accept.
Tehran distrusts the dealmakers
During a discussion with political and media figures organized by the Iranian embassy in Lebanon, Khatibzadeh was openly pessimistic about an agreement. Past experience, he argued, gave Tehran little reason to believe Washington would honor another undertaking.
He described three competing currents within the US: the traditional institutions, an isolationist faction that approaches foreign policy through deals, and a hardline bloc committed to Israel. Their differences, in his assessment, restrict the chances of successful negotiations under Trump.
One faction within the administration had wanted an MoU, he said, while another had no intention of implementing it. The two sides could have reached an agreement had Washington kept its commitments. Tehran’s distrust dates back to the 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), which Trump abandoned in 2018, and the failed efforts to revive it under former US president Joe Biden.
Researcher and political writer Ali Mourad tells The Cradle that Khatibzadeh’s remarks reveal when Iran’s reassessment began:
“What stands out is the indication that the shift toward revising Iranian doctrine began during the 12-day war, following the Israeli attack. This shift reflects a change in how Iran views threats and deals with them, prompting it to reconsider its military doctrine as well as its traditional diplomatic approach to negotiations.”
Mourad says the diplomat’s account shows that “the Iranians have become more cautious in dealing with the diplomatic process, following repeated experiences in which negotiations appeared to be making progress, only for Iran to come under attack. These experiences have deepened distrust of the United States, given what the Iranians see as a change in Washington’s diplomatic approach, linked to Donald Trump’s personality and outlook, and his administration’s subordination to the Zionist bloc controlled by Benjamin Netanyahu.”
The isolationists and the bloc supporting Israel sometimes pursue conflicting agendas, Mourad adds. But the isolationists’ declining influence, together with Trump’s closer alignment with Israel’s supporters, has reduced their ability to shape his decisions. For Tehran, an agreement with one part of the administration offers little assurance that the rest will implement it.
Preparing to strike again
As negotiations stall, all sides are increasing their military readiness. Washington is counting on superior firepower to force concessions. Tehran is relying on its geography and its ability to disrupt trade, energy supplies, and the alternative routes exporters have sought to use. Any renewed assault would test how much of that disruption the US and its allies can bear.
US military planners are considering attacks involving the GBU-43/B Massive Ordnance Air Blast bomb, known as the “Mother of All Bombs,” against Iranian energy infrastructure and nuclear sites, including the suspected facility at Pickaxe Mountain.
US officials quoted in that reporting questioned whether the weapon could penetrate the granite shielding the site. One described it as a weapon for clearing a large area, rather than a warhead designed to reach deeply buried facilities.
Trump has ruled out sending ground troops into Iran while threatening further strikes. Iran’s then-acting defense minister, Seyyed Majid Ibn al-Reza, dismissed Washington’s threats on 17 October, saying that the names and sizes of US bombs were irrelevant. “Your bombs explode elsewhere: in your global standing, the American economy, and even your electoral calculations,” he wrote, arguing that Iran’s missile capabilities had changed the balance.
Israeli security chiefs met on 15 October to discuss renewed confrontation with Iran, alongside US–Israeli security consultations. Yedioth Ahronoth cited security sources saying Israel could not attack without Trump’s approval. Netanyahu, meanwhile, has continued to claim success in the war while pressing for further attacks to achieve its remaining aims.
Netanyahu had described an attack before the elections as “not convenient” on 14 October, following reports that he had urged Trump to resume the war.
Tehran has warned that another assault would bring a harsher response. Supreme National Security Council Secretary Mohsen Rezaei threatened attacks on cables, data centers, AI facilities, and other sites across the region if intense fighting resumed. His warning extended Iran’s threatened retaliation to the digital infrastructure serving US interests in the Gulf.
Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) also says Tehran acquired highly advanced weapons after the latest fighting and can respond more forcefully than before. The Wall Street Journal (WSJ) reported that Iran was strengthening its defenses and mobilizing supporters in preparation for possible US attacks after the midterms.
Satellite imagery showed reinforcement of nuclear facilities and border areas, including earthworks around Pickaxe Mountain and Natanz intended to obstruct a ground raid. Iranian officials have also described preparations at airports, seaports, and power plants, with shelters and backup supplies intended to keep them operating during renewed attacks.
Writer and political analyst Qassem Qassir considers a major war before the US and Israeli elections unlikely, although he does not rule out Israeli security operations or intensified strikes in the coming days. A wider confrontation would carry considerable costs so close to the Israeli vote.
Netanyahu could still push the region into a confrontation with Iran or Lebanon, Qassir says, but continued escalation and limited strikes remain more likely. He reads Khatibzadeh’s remarks as evidence that Tehran is preparing for several scenarios, including a renewed attack. With no settled rules of engagement between Iran, the US, and Israel, neither the scale of Iran’s response nor the reach of the fighting is assured.
Hormuz keeps the pressure on Trump
The IRGC has declared Hormuz closed and warned that vessels violating Iranian regulations could be set ablaze. Iran’s army says the waterway is under full surveillance, and its forces are ready. Army commander Major General Amir Hatami vowed on 15 October that the strait would remain shut until the Iranian people’s rights were honored.
Washington expects a tighter blockade to exhaust Iran’s economy and force its leadership to retreat. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent has described a shift from “maximum pressure” to “total isolation.” The two-week deadline he gave for economic pressure to produce results has passed, while Tehran continues to use Hormuz to impose costs on its adversaries.
FT reported a sharp fall in oil movements. Kpler data, also reported by Enterprise, put Gulf oil outflows at a daily average of 15.5 million barrels in September, while only 2.9 million barrels moved through the strait on 11 October. Iran’s attacks are keeping energy markets under pressure as Trump seeks lower prices before the congressional elections.
Preparing for a war lasting months
Iran’s preparations also extend to its nuclear options. Khatibzadeh said Supreme Leader Mojtaba Khamenei had issued no new religious ruling on nuclear weapons, and that Tehran was seriously considering withdrawal from the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) alongside internal discussions on revising its nuclear doctrine.
At a Beirut seminar on Iran’s view of the region and the international order after the war, Khatibzadeh said his country’s calculations rested on restraint. He nevertheless described the conflict as “an existential war for Iran,” arguing that the region was moving away from US security arrangements toward a new order.
“The power of the United States has been broken, and will be broken again,” he said. His warning reflected the preparations he had outlined throughout the visit: “Political realism requires us to say that, until further notice, we must prepare for the worst-case scenarios.”
Tehran no longer considers itself bound to the previous rules of engagement, Khatibzadeh said, and is preparing for fighting that could last months. Describing Iran as “the only fortress resisting US domination today,” he insisted that it “will not surrender in this existential battle.”
No comments:
Post a Comment