Middle East
Trump’s return to power: Tehran is in the throes of fear and hope
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.
Middle East
Iran resumes ballistic missile assembly using stockpiled parts
Iran has resumed ballistic missile production in underground facilities, despite statements by Israeli and US authorities asserting that this capacity had been completely eliminated.
According to a report by The Wall Street Journal citing US and Middle Eastern officials, the Tehran administration is utilizing pre-stockpiled components in the manufacturing process.
Officials report that despite strikes on missile sites and industrial installations at the beginning of the war, Iran continues the assembly of both solid- and liquid-fuelled missiles.
Intelligence data indicates activity at numerous underground centres, including the Khojir complex in the southeast of the country, along with efforts to establish additional underground assembly points to protect against new air strikes.
Current assembly operations are being maintained at lower volumes compared with pre-war levels, as US and Israeli operations destroyed several facilities and a naval blockade has impeded the import of components and solid-fuel ingredients.
Assessing the process, Tal Inbar, a senior analyst at the US-based Missile Defense Advocacy Alliance, stressed that damaged infrastructure can be repaired during periods when facilities are not targeted, and parts procured from other countries can be stored there.
Inbar noted that it would be naive to believe Iran is not rebuilding its missile production capacity.
Arguing that the facilities were destroyed and Tehran has suffered severe losses, the official stated that Iran remains weaker than ever before, and US President Donald Trump will never permit the country to acquire nuclear weapons.
Pentagon spokesman Sean Parnell stated that the US has destroyed up to 90% of Iran’s drone, ballistic missile, and naval industrial infrastructure, severely degrading Tehran’s ability to launch missiles and unmanned aerial vehicles.
Another US government official pointed out that the Tehran administration may have revived production, albeit on a low scale, following preliminary talks conducted in mid-June with the Trump administration regarding the opening of the Strait of Hormuz and ending the war. The official noted that existing stockpiles are sufficient to assemble at least two hundred missiles.
A CNN report in late May indicated that the Tehran administration was attempting to reopen underground missile shelters, struck by the US and Israel with costly munitions, using bulldozers and dump trucks.
Excavation activities accelerated after the April ceasefire decision; out of 69 tunnel entrances struck across 18 distinct locations, 50 have been made accessible again.
Experts stressed that it is impossible to destroy missile power solely by bombing tunnel entrances, underlining the limitations of such bombardments.
US Secretary of War Pete Hegseth claimed in April that they had effectively ended Iran’s missile programme. However, an NBC News report noted that Tehran utilized the ceasefire period to reconstitute its military strength.
Middle East
Mohammed bin Salman urges Trump to strike Houthis after Mokha falls
Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman has requested that US President Donald Trump launch air strikes against the Houthis in Yemen.
According to two US officials who spoke to Axios, Trump rejected the request, and US officials emphasised that the administration has no plans for direct intervention against the Houthis for now.
Oil prices surged on Thursday after the resistance led by Houthi militias (Ansarallah) seized the strategic coastal city of Mokha in Yemen.
This development brought the Yemeni resistance one step closer to the Bab el-Mandeb Strait, which is vital for global trade and Saudi oil exports.
With Iran already disrupting traffic in the Strait of Hormuz, Houthi control over Bab el-Mandeb could provide Tehran with powerful new leverage over the US and its Gulf allies.
On Thursday, as Houthi forces advanced towards the coastal city of Mokha and Saudi-backed Yemeni forces retreated, bin Salman telephoned Trump to brief him on the deteriorating situation.
A few hours later, the prince called again to request that Trump carry out US air strikes against the Houthis.
Trump declined, but a US official stated that the administration would provide Saudi Arabia with intelligence and targeting data on the Houthis.
The official noted that approximately 200 US military personnel are currently stationed in Saudi Arabia, providing non-military support.
A senior Trump administration official indicated that Washington’s priority is keeping the Red Sea open, while leaving the broader fight to regional partners.
“We are in continuous dialogue with Saudi Arabia and the Government of the Republic of Yemen regarding regional stability,” the official said.
The official continued:
“The US remains focused on protecting our core national security interests, such as ensuring freedom of navigation in the Red Sea, while empowering our regional partners to take the lead in managing and resolving regional security challenges.”
The US is concerned by the rapidly escalating conflict in Yemen and is seeking to avoid direct military intervention while increasing its support for Saudi Arabia.
According to two sources familiar with the matter, Admiral Brad Cooper, Commander of US Central Command (CENTCOM), travelled to Saudi Arabia on Thursday for urgent coordination meetings.
The conflict between Saudi Arabia and Yemeni resistance forces reignited in July after Riyadh blocked an Iranian aircraft carrying senior Houthi officials from landing in Sanaa following their return from Ali Khamenei’s funeral.
Bin Salman requested Trump’s political support to strike Sanaa airport, but made clear that Saudi Arabia did not require US military assistance. Trump granted his support.
The Houthis subsequently retaliated by attacking Saudi tankers in the Red Sea. These strikes threatened a route crucial to the kingdom’s oil exports, and the group later expanded its attacks to Saudi energy facilities.
Saudi Arabia and its Yemeni allies responded with air strikes and ground operations against Houthi positions.
Saudi Arabia’s request for direct US military intervention marks a sharp reversal from July, when Riyadh informed Washington that it could manage the Houthis on its own.
As clashes intensified, the Saudis began seeking progressively greater support from the US.
Sources close to the discussions noted that in recent weeks, US military and civilian officials informed their Saudi counterparts that Trump’s directive is to keep American forces focused on Iran and the Strait of Hormuz, and to avoid opening a new front.
Middle East
Netanyahu ignored MBZ warning on Hamas 7 October plan, report says
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu reportedly ignored a direct warning from UAE President Sheikh Mohamed bin Zayed Al Nahyan in the run-up to 7 October 2023, according to an investigation by the Israeli newspaper Haaretz.
The report states that the UAE leader, widely known as MBZ, was convinced in September 2023 that an explosion was imminent in the region, particularly given the escalating tensions in the West Bank.
Israeli President Isaac Herzog, who maintains close ties with bin Zayed, recounted: “In the months leading up to the war, he spoke with me about this issue frequently. He consistently conveyed the message that the situation needed to be de-escalated. He even dispatched a special envoy to Israel who met with the prime minister. The emir appeared to sense that the region was on the verge of erupting.”
MBZ also engaged in direct discussions with Netanyahu. These exchanges followed a standard operational protocol: a representative from the United Arab Emirates embassy would arrive at the prime minister’s office equipped with a specialised, secure telephone device to ensure confidentiality.
However, according to the newspaper, the call initiated by bin Zayed on this occasion was extraordinary in nature.
A week and a half before 7 October 2023, the UAE ruler placed a call to Netanyahu from the Presidential Palace in Abu Dhabi, and the two leaders spoke for 45 minutes.
During this conversation, bin Zayed warned that Yahya Sinwar, the Hamas leader in Gaza, was planning a major operation against Israel.
Bin Zayed voiced deep concern that such an event would not only lead to significant bloodshed, but would also destabilise the entire region and undermine the Abraham Accords.
Haaretz reported that three senior foreign sources possess direct knowledge of the call’s contents, marking the first public disclosure of the conversation’s existence.
A close Palestinian adviser to bin Zayed, who had emigrated from Gaza to Abu Dhabi years earlier and maintained extensive connections across the Gaza Strip, was also present during the exchange.
According to the adviser, the UAE ruler stressed to Netanyahu that Israel needed to prepare for this specific threat.
The adviser stated:
“The emir explained that, according to his assessment, Sinwar was preparing for a major event. He told Netanyahu that Israel had to be prepared. At the same time, he proposed working towards an economic solution for the Gaza Strip to prevent escalation, alongside calming the situation in the West Bank.”
Bin Zayed urged Netanyahu to take the matter seriously. Yet, to the emir’s surprise, the prime minister reacted with relative calm.
Netanyahu told bin Zayed that, in his own assessment, Hamas was planning to operate in the West Bank area. Reassuring the Emirati leader, Netanyahu insisted that Israel was prepared for any scenario.
The UAE leader later recounted his conversation with Netanyahu and his subsequent warning to CIA Director William J. Burns.
Bin Zayed shared with Burns the intuitive alarm he had sought to convey to Netanyahu—that “something over there is about to blow”—and noted the Israeli prime minister’s conviction that the unstable theatre was in fact the West Bank.
“The emir hoped that, despite Netanyahu’s reserved reaction, he would take the message seriously and take action,” the adviser said.
However, neither anticipated that the prime minister would hear the warning without briefing the heads of his defence and security establishments: neither the director of the Shin Bet, nor the director of the Mossad, nor the chief of staff of the Israel Defence Forces was informed of MBZ’s warning.
Haaretz noted that Gaza-related negotiations between Israel and Hamas had been proceeding smoothly in early 2023, providing the context in which the Emirati ruler’s concerns emerged.
The report received swift corroboration from the Israeli political opposition. Former prime minister and leader of the B’Yachad party, Naftali Bennett, stated that he knew the warning issued by UAE leader Mohamed bin Zayed to Netanyahu concerning Hamas’s plans prior to 7 October was genuine.
Speaking to 103FM, Bennett said: “I am telling you: I know this to be true.”
Bennett continued:
“Mohamed bin Zayed of the UAE warned Netanyahu that Sinwar was planning an operation. The head of the Egyptian General Intelligence Directorate, Abbas Kamel, also notified Netanyahu a few days before the massacre that a major operation was being planned. I do not wish to discuss my sources with anyone. I am telling you: I know this fact to be true.”
Contending that Netanyahu had led Israel “blindly into this horrific disaster,” the opposition figure asserted: “He was so deeply captive to the conception that Hamas was an asset that, despite receiving explicit warnings, he did nothing.”
Bennett maintained that Netanyahu bears direct responsibility for 7 October, not merely by virtue of being prime minister, but because “he spent 15 years strengthening Hamas and doing nothing.”
-
Europe4 days agoGermany’s CDU drafts tougher citizenship rules to counter AfD
-
Russia1 week agoWhat to know about Russia’s upcoming State Duma elections?
-
Europe2 weeks agoMarine Le Pen leads all 2027 French presidential scenarios, poll shows
-
Middle East1 week agoIran expands deterrence as Gulf strikes expose US munitions limits, analysts say
-
Europe1 week agoGerman industrial bosses push for return to 40-hour working week
-
Diplomacy1 week agoGeoffrey Roberts sees Ukraine war concluding within coming months
-
Russia2 weeks agoRussia warns NATO over Arctic militarisation and conflict risks
-
Asia1 week agoBOJ faces critical rate decision as US presses for faster hikes
