By Ahmad Rafat
A letter from U.S. President Donald Trump was delivered to Iran’s Supreme Leader, Ali Khamenei — finally.
Contrary to expectations, it was not sent via Arab countries with friendly ties to the Islamic Republic, such as Qatar and Oman. Instead, it was brought to Tehran by Anwar Mohammed Gargash, who served as the United Arab Emirates (UAE) Minister of State for Foreign Affairs from 2008 to 2021 and is now a senior diplomatic advisor to the President of the UAE.
This choice of messenger speaks volumes about the letter’s content. The letter, reportedly carrying a harsh tone along with Trump’s warnings and threats, puts Khamenei in a challenging position — forcing him to choose between submission and war.
As a result, Arab nations with close ties to Iran distanced themselves from the delivery. The UAE, which has had strained relations with the Islamic Republic for years, had no qualms about taking on the responsibility and agreed to deliver Trump’s message to Khamenei.
There has been no official response to the letter as of now, and it seems highly unlikely that Khamenei would personally write to the U.S. president.
In his two most recent speeches before receiving the letter, Khamenei made his opposition to direct negotiations with the U.S. very clear, making it improbable that he would alter his position.
Trump’s demands outlined in the letter reportedly go beyond the complete cessation of the nuclear program: They also call for a drastic shift in the Islamic Republic’s regional policies, including ending support for proxy forces and imposing restrictions on missile and drone programs.
Agreeing to these demands would effectively mean the end of the Islamic Republic and an abandonment of the policies it has followed for the past 45 years.
However, it is not entirely out of the question that, as events unfold, the Islamic Republic might agree to temporarily scale back its nuclear program, possibly returning to a stance similar to the early days after the 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), also known as the Iran nuclear deal.
Russia and China, the Islamic Republic’s most significant allies today, are also open to supporting the demands of the West and the U.S.
However, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov has made it clear that Russia is unwilling to back calls for changes in the Islamic Republic’s regional policies, calling such a demand unacceptable.
ANALYSIS: Despite Tough Talk, Economic Woes May Force Iran to Bargain with Trump
The Iranian regime also cannot accept demands regarding its missile and drone programs.
Khamenei hopes that, at least in the medium term, the consequences of rejecting Trump’s demands will be limited to escalated sanctions, which he is prepared to confront and circumvent.
Nevertheless, there is a divergence of views within the Iranian regime on this issue. Some factions, in line with Khamenei, oppose any form of negotiation.
Military commanders firmly support the stance of avoiding talks with the U.S. Major General Abdolrahim Mousavi, the commander-in-chief of the Islamic Republic of Iran’s Army (AJA), said: “No sane person can accept negotiations under pressure and sanctions.”
He had previously rejected negotiations, emphasizing, “We do not welcome war and chaos, nor do we like it, but if war breaks out and something happens, we will defend Iran with power.”
Brigadier General Hossein Ashtari, the senior advisor to the General Staff of the Armed Forces of the Islamic Republic of Iran, shares Khamenei’s position, viewing negotiations with the U.S. as harmful to Iran’s national interests.
By contrast, another faction, which includes so-called reformists and moderates such as former President Hassan Rouhani, believes that the lack of dialogue with the U.S. is crippling the Islamic Republic’s already struggling economy. Rouhani suggests that negotiations could resume if conditions change, with Khamenei’s approval.
Historically, Khamenei has permitted talks with the U.S. on Iraq, Afghanistan, and the JCPOA issues without taking direct responsibility for them.
Supporters of negotiations with Trump warn of the risk of widespread protests due to worsening living conditions from increased sanctions, and argue that the regime must seriously consider this threat.
Trump’s threat of military action if the Islamic Republic does not come to the negotiating table is not being taken seriously by Khamenei and his advisors at the moment. They believe that the U.S. president is reluctant to engage in a new war.
Also, any military action taken by Israel which sees the Islamic Republic’s nuclear program as a direct threat to its security will probably be limited.
Khamenei has determined that, even without direct and public negotiations, Trump would prefer informal and covert talks over open confrontation.
The Islamic Republic also counts on opposition from European and Arab nations to any military strike on its nuclear facilities.
Recently, Kaja Kallas, the High Representative of the European Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, reaffirmed that diplomacy is the only viable way to halt the Islamic Republic’s nuclear program.
Arab nations are increasingly concerned about the potential repercussions of an Israeli military strike on Iran.
This concern is reflected in recent comments by Qatari Prime Minister Sheikh Mohammed bin Abdulrahman bin Jassim bin Jaber Al Thani, who cautioned that any military action against Iran could trigger “a war across the entire region.”
Some Arab states, including Saudi Arabia, which had previously opposed the JCPOA and deemed it inadequate in curbing Iran’s nuclear ambitions, are now against escalating pressure on Tehran.
The evolving relations between these countries and Iran, along with growing ties between many Gulf states, Russia, and China, have played a significant role in this shift in perspective.
Iran’s neighbors are increasingly concerned about the potential consequences of an Israeli military strike, supported by the U.S., on Iran’s nuclear and military facilities.
Tehran lacks the military strength to effectively counter Israel, as demonstrated by two prior exchanges between the two nations. In those incidents, fewer than 10 percent of the missiles launched by Iran against Israel breached the country’s air defense systems, while Israel successfully destroyed more than 70 percent of Iran’s anti-aircraft defenses.
Although Iran’s proxy forces have been significantly weakened, they could still be used to carry out missile, drone, or terrorist attacks on U.S. military bases in nearby Arab countries. This uncertainty remains a significant worry for Iran’s neighbors.
PPI Survey Indicates Most Iranians Want Regime Change, Secular Government
