Undoubtedly, the news of Donald Trump’s victory as the 47th president-elect of the United States is without a doubt deafening for the Islamic Republic of Iran, because in the four years of his last-time as president in the White House, Tehran was in dire straits in every way.

Qassem Soleimani, Iranian major general and commander of the IRGC Quds Force, was assassinated by Trump’s order in Baghdad, the capital city of Iraq in January 2020. Trump was also ordered to put the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) of Iran on the blacklist of the US. In the same way, what the administrations of Barack Obama and Hassan Rouhani under the name of “JCPOA” were with great difficulty, carelessly cottoned them in the blink of an eye and even in the context did not respect the point of view of his country’s western allies (European Troika).

However, Trump did not stop there and tried to further isolate Iran by supporting Israel, Saudi Arabia and the UAE. Now that Trump has become the ruler again, it is obvious that what it has done against Tehran is circulating in the minds of Iranians again, and it evokes the fear that it may repeat the same path.

We don’t speak pessimistically. We discussed Trump’s possible confrontation with Iran that he may not act as he did in the past, but the point is how Iran will react or take action if Trump did not change.

Iran is ready to face Trump

It is important to know whether the Iranian side is ready to deal with Trump or not? If Iran is ready, to what extent? Of course, this is in the case that the American side gives a green light, otherwise, it is not possible. Since Tehran has received severe wounds by Trump, it is not unlikely that it will go to him with a green light. Anyway, the argument is aimed at proving the interaction-seeking tendency of Iran’s 14th government with Trump’s second government, which is explained below:

First:

It’s true that when Trump first entered the White House, no one knew him well. Maybe the Americans didn’t know it right either, because he suddenly entered the field of politics, he quickly won and achieved what he wanted. During his first election campaign and after winning, numerous articles and books were written about him, but when he went to the White House, he took actions that worried even the Western allies of his own country.

Qassem Soleimani, Iranian major general and commander of the IRGC Quds Force, was assassinated by Trump’s order in Iraq.

Therefore, from then on, his behavior is called unpredictable and what he says is mostly viewed with skepticism. Now, Trump’s four-year record is like a mirror before the eyes of the Islamic Republic of Iran. Of course, no country knows him better than Iran.

In the past, Tehran bowed its back under the pressure of Trump because it did not know him well and was always faced with actions which were already executed by the then Trump administration. Now that Tehran knows Trump, it is trying to reduce its level of effectiveness of what he is doing. Maybe this recognition will encourage the parties to agree to a new deal.

Second:

The fact is that Iran is in a situation where it cannot deal with Trump’s adventure. The inflammatory situation of the region is not to his benefit but to his detriment. It is true that Trump is a deal maker, but he is not a joker. The so-called “axis of resistance” in the Middle East has lost its former hegemony.

For example, Hamas, which was a strong bulwark against Israel, has been weakened and its future is unclear. Although Hezbollah has not been weakened to that extent, it is in unprecedented trouble, and it is not clear to what extent the implementation of UN Security Council Resolution 1701 will limit its “scope of action”.

Israel is also standing by the sword and if there is no apparent pressure from the White House, it will not hesitate to enter into a “decisive war” with Tehran. Considering the above cases, the Iranian side, understanding its prohibitions and the knowledge it has gained from Trump, is not disinterested in tuning the instrument of reconciliation with the USA.

Third:

If we pay attention to Trump’s election and non-election speeches, we can call him a “peace seeker”. Of course, his pacifism comes from his economic concern.” When he says he will end wars in the world, he means that his country’s economy will not suffer. In his election campaigns, he constantly emphasized the economy and used it as a tool to pressure his rival.

Even when he brings up the story of immigrants, his intention is that their presence harms the US economy. If Trump is serious in his pacifism, he can end the war in Gaza and Lebanon – something that will make the Iranian side inclined towards the USA.

Iran’s Vice President Mohammad Reza Aref during his visit to Saudi Arabia, said that the world is waiting for Trump’s slogans to end wars. This statement by Aref contradicts what Trump did against Iran in the last four years of his tenure, but still Iran hopes Trump delivers on his promises.

Trump got angry with Iran to such an extent that many thought that he was a warmonger, contrary to her slogans. Trump is not belligerent, but the pressure he puts on his rival is not less than the negative consequences of entering into a war. Maybe this time he wants to resolve the previous contradiction.

Only those in Iran, some of the US’s strong competitors in other parts of the world, see Trump’s return as an opportunity rather than a threat, for which Russia is a clear example. In Moscow’s view, Trump is a pacifist Republican who wants peace, and therefore, Moscow seeks to use his presence in the White House.

Meanwhile, Ukraine has fought stubbornly against Moscow with Washington’s money for the past three years and has killed thousands of Russian soldiers with American weapons. When the rulers of the Kremlin look at Trump as an opportunity with this situation, why should the Iranian side deny the necessity of dialogue with him.

Fourth:

Now that a reformist government is at work in Iran, it can be said that the prospects for the relationship between Tehran and Washington under Trump rule will not be as dark as in the past.

Apart from the fact that the reformists are interested in dialogue with the Westerners, especially the US, Masoud Pezeshkian, the president of Iran, cares more than any reformist to move on a calm and safe path in foreign policy.

He did not have a clear slogan in his election campaigns, except for the lifting of sanctions – something that will not be possible without coming to terms with America. But the dark side of the current reality is that Pezeshkian inherited the state of war with Israel, which definitely impacted any kind of talks with the US in regards to bilateral issues. But apparently, he will not allow his government to become a victim of a war.

Of course, there are those in Iran who take Trump’s return as a good omen – they think that while the narrow path of negotiation with the US will be blinded, the 14th government will not be able to fulfill what it has promised. Radical fundamentalists think this way, and Pezeshkian and top officials around him understand their intentions well.

Therefore, Pezeshkian and his close officials are vigilantly monitoring the situation and will respond to even a weak voice from the US that indicates negotiations. Pezeshkian’s 100 days of risky government has become the headline of Iranian media these days and a warm discussion is going on between supporters and opponents.

Israel’s new Defense Minister, Israel Katz, appointed by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to replace the recently dismissed Yoav Gallant, has sparked surprise with a bold declaration regarding Israel’s stance on Hezbollah. Katz stated that one of Israel’s primary goals is to disarm Hezbollah, leaving Chief of Staff Herzi Halevi notably surprised.

As Israel advances into southern Lebanon, negotiations continue in Washington and Beirut over a possible resolution to the ongoing conflict between Israel and Hezbollah. However, Katz emphasized that Israel would not halt its efforts until all military objectives are achieved.

“We will not cease fire, we will not ease pressure, and we will not support any agreement that does not fully achieve the goals of this war,” Katz declared during a visit to the Northern Command alongside Lieutenant General Herzi Halevi.

Katz outlined these objectives as: “disarming Hezbollah, pushing them beyond the Litani River, and ensuring the safe return of Israelis in northern areas to their homes.”

In the accompanying video, Halevi appeared visibly taken aback by Katz’s mention of disarming Hezbollah as an official objective, as this has not been publicly stated as a government directive.

מה הוא אמר עכשיו? כששר הביטחון הגדיר מטרת מלחמה חדשה – והפתיע את הרמטכ"ל#כאן_בשש @mayarachlin @roysharon11 @gilicohen10 @ItayBlumental pic.twitter.com/K1Dy9bennd

— כאן חדשות (@kann_news) November 13, 2024

Katz further stressed Israel’s right to “implement any agreement independently and to act decisively against any terrorist activity or organization.” He added, “We must continue to strike Hezbollah with full force.”

6 Israeli soldiers killed

Meanwhile, as Israel presses forward with its ground invasion of southern Lebanon, six more Israeli soldiers were killed in a clash with Hezbollah forces. This incident, one of the heaviest single-day casualties for Israel since the invasion’s onset, highlights the intensifying nature of the conflict.

According to a statement by the Israeli army, the soldiers, all from the 51st Battalion of the Golani Brigade, were killed in fire exchange with at least four Hezbollah fighters inside a building in a southern Lebanese village.

The International Criminal Court (ICC) has enlisted independent investigators to examine allegations of sexual harassment against Prosecutor Karim Khan.

The accusations against Khan surfaced as the ICC evaluated Khan’s request to issue arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former Defence Minister Yoav Gallant over alleged war crimes in Gaza.

Finnish diplomat Päivi Kaukoranta, who leads the ICC’s oversight body, stated that an external investigation was initiated after reports surfaced that Khan had acted inappropriately toward a female colleague. Normally, such matters are managed by the court’s internal audit, but Khan personally requested that the Independent Supervisory Mechanism (ISM) oversee the case. Kaukoranta explained, “In light of the case’s unique circumstances, the ISM’s victim-centered approach, and the potential for conflicts of interest, the ISM agreed to the exceptional use of an external investigation.”

Khan denied the allegations, stating, “I have previously called for an investigation into this matter and welcome the opportunity to participate in this process.”

The investigation coincides with the ICC’s deliberation over Khan’s request to issue warrants for Netanyahu and Gallant on charges of war crimes and crimes against humanity related to Israel’s actions in Gaza.

While Khan’s move was supported internationally, it drew criticism from the Biden administration and U.S. Congress. The U.S. House of Representatives recently passed legislation that sanctions individuals affiliated with the ICC, including judges and their families, underscoring the U.S. policy of opposition to ICC jurisdiction over Israel.

Reports have also surfaced regarding Israel’s alleged threats toward ICC officials. In May, The Guardian revealed that Khan’s predecessor, Fatou Bensouda, was pressured in “a series of secret meetings” with Mossad chief Yossi Cohen, a close ally of Netanyahu. Cohen reportedly advised Bensouda to “drop the war crimes investigation,” allegedly warning her, “You don’t want to be involved in anything that could endanger your safety or your family’s safety.”

Khan has since noted he faced pressure before submitting his application for the arrest warrant.