Oh, please, NYT! Stop falling for the same old, tired ploy where Trump precipitates a crisis (in this case by pulling out of the nuclear arms deal) and then swoops in to save us all from the crisis he created. Didn't you fatten his ego enough with all the free publicity you gave him 2016? Enough!
299
You know the answer .. stop playing games .. because Israel & the Saudis care about Iran .. not Afghanistan or N Korea ... and what Israel & the Saudis want .. they get
87
Bibi will never approve.
71
Actually, Ahmadinejad, dos not carry any weight in Iran and wasn’t speaking on behalf of Iran and Iranians. Only he thinks Trump is a man of action, the rest think he is a big bully. Iran isn’t going to be pushed around easily. There was no reason for trump to pull out of the nuclear deal, which was an excellent beginning, and he could have build onto it. Trump destroyed it because Obama was instrumental in bringing the deal about.
108
Ahmadinejad is flattering Trump in the hopes he can get the same deal as North Korea: Everything Iran wants in exchange for a photo-op and some more Trumpian praise. And like North Korea, offering Trump a face-saving way out of a crisis he created.
US foreign policy has devolved into "Heads you win; Tails I lose." Engaging with Iran is good foreign policy. However, Trump always manages to enter the conversation from a position of weakness. Weaker say than if we had just adhered to Obama's Iranian agreement in the first place.
I'm really sick of this President. Incompetent is too polite a word.
155
Donald Trump can't be trusted to negotiate much of anything given that he's apt to reverse himself within hours- or minutes- of forging an agreement or even of composing a tweet. He wants his Nobel Peace Prize but only on his own fluid terms and only for the sake of his own ego and/or his personal finances. Having withdrawn from the nuclear agreement that seven nations, including ours, negotiated with Tehran he's already left America's credibility slide into the garbage can of history. He has nothing useful to say to Iran or anyone else.
88
Having a pair of congenital liars, poseurs, and unreasonable hard-liners talk, one out of power and the other drunk with it, couldn't possibly have any adverse consequences, could it?
83
I am always among the first to be critical of Trump. Particularly when the criticism relates to his lying, his bragging, his racism,his vulgarity and his misogyny.However his free wheeling approach to foreign policy including meeting with dictators past and present without preconditions is unprecedented. The intuitive Trump may be right on this one. Lets hope so.
13
I am not fooled. The only people Trump is able to deal with is dictators, murderers and criminals. He doesn’t negotiate, he capitulates and the whole world should be worried about what he is giving away and what they are giving him in return.
48
In ordinary times, speaking with an adversary in order to avoid disaster is very reasonable and civilized to seek. With Trump, however, present time is chaotically distorted ... and never mind Iran, a whole other problem. Distrust is rampant when it comes to the way we are represented and “them,” because of lying and posturing and egos. As to reference to Trump’s “wisdom”: This is a joke, right? This individual is not to be trusted ... he has shown himself again and again to be a con man ... which was known by many before he was elected ... which says something about many of us.
34
Trump is the cause for this,why did he walk away from Iran agreement? because Obama made the deal .Trump is a very vicious person ,he has support of a spineless Republican party .
64
“Mr. Trump is a man of action,” Mr. Ahmadinejad told The Times. “He is a businessman and therefore he is capable of calculating cost-benefits and making a decision".
Trump's cost-benefits calculations are always based Trump's total personal gain!
33
Here we go again. Trump is only interested in himself, and the straight path to making hatred great again. The perfect match: just like Kim Jong Un.
Iran doesn't need Ahmadinejad, and we are ill served by the dumpster fire of vanity.
MBS and Putin have him, mostly likely, because of kompromat and money (billions to Jared for 666 5th Avenue, Deutschebank and money laundering, etc. etc.). Do we really need a president who would be in jail if he weren't "above" the law, according to his handpicked AG and team of villains, and the passive win at any cost Republicans?
This is a truly terrible deal. We are lucky Iran came to its senses and got rid of Ahmadinejad. But we have become the world's pariah in the process, and that's dangerous.
I doubt Trump would regard him as a "very fine" person, or that they would exchange love letters like KJU. What a terrible bunch!
22
Since they're talking about talking, maybe it's time do do some walking...like walking back the sanctions trump put in place so as to get back to square one.
21
First, Ahmadinejad motivation is to return to power. We really don't need another unstable narcissist in addition to Trump in this explosive situation. While talking is always better that fighting Trump's incompetence would cause talks to end in failure like all of his other negotiations. One just has to look at the North Korea negotiations to see how failure is inevitable. After a lot of bluster and then despite a lot of over the top posturing about his great relationship with Kim, the negotiations have gone nowhere and the situation is slipping back to where it started as Kim threatens to start testing nukes again. The only conclusion Ayatollah Khamenei can draw from this behavior is that Trump is a blundering buffoon who cannot be trusted to either stick to agreements or back his belligerent over the top rhetoric. Khamenei probably realizes that if he agrees to talk he, like Kim, will get stuck in the same sanctions stalemate. Khamenei's strategy of escalating aggressive moves has exposed Trump's diplomatic isolation and his fear of starting a war. Khamenei and Trump both think they have a winning strategy and that will inevitably lead to war.
10
Ahmadinejad has given new meaning to the word 'cynicism'. He was elected as a result of U.S. treachery in undermining the reform movement of President Khatemi. Ahmadinejad then heaped 8 years of misery on the Iranian people and set the reform movement back two decades.
Everyone knows it's time to talk, but Ahmadinejad ("We have no homosexuals in Iran", even as they were executed for that 'crime') is not the right person to suggest, let alone arrange, direct talks between the two leaders.
U.S. talks with the Taleban and North Korea will go nowhere. The one is fanatical, the other wily.
Now here's the thing (as Americans like to say):
Negotiations with Iran could succeed, but this would require Israel to stop stealing Palestinian and Syrian lands, for Saudi Arabia to stop financing and weaponising ISIS and Al Qaeda, and for the U.S. to lift sanctions unilaterally. What I am suggesting is a Grand Bargain, of the type proposed by Ayatollah Khamenei via the Swiss Embassy on May 2nd, 2003. The faxed proposal scared the daylights out of the Neocons and Zionists running the Dubya administration, and the very genuine and courageous proposal was consigned to the dustbin.
A Grand Bargain today? Israel won't 'allow' it, because it would require relinquishing Zionist dreams of a Greater Israel and the implementation of a Two-state solution.
So we are in a stalemate: The only solution is a Grand Bargain, but peace is an illusion as long as Israel and Saudi Arabia stand in the way.
34
Did you see how Trump talked to Nobel Peace Prize and ISIS victim Nadia Murad yesterday in the Oval Office?
He didn't even have the guts to sit in front of her and look her in the eyes when she was telling him what horrors she had to go through, and after she said that her parents and siblings all died, asked "where are they now?".
If there's something that Trump is VERY bad at, it's talking, and talking in such a way that those whom he (pretends to or seriously) disagrees with feel respected. And knowing how to master the "art of diplomacy" is THE prerequisite to be able to achieve any diplomatic victory.
That is precisely why he didn't sign ANY of his signature campaign promises into law, even though his own party controlled DC for two years: h He does NOT know how to obtain political agreements.
He also refused to hire diplomats and real experts, when it comes to foreign policy. So whom will Iran now talk to? The utterly lying and unreliable, war-mongering Iraq architect Bolton, whom Trump appointed as his chief adviser even though he was the only Republican to have had the guts to "tell it like it is", during the GOP primaries, when it comes to the GOP's disastrous Iraq war?
Conclusion: I'm sorry, but a headline that says that Trump and Ahmadinejad are right, while their decisions and actions are once again inflaming the region, endangering American troops and our most important ally Israel ... just because both SAID they like diplomacy, is a bit ridiculous, no?
54
Duh. Mr. Trump will talk to Iranian leaders only when Saudi Arabia authorizes him to do so.
19
Puffery over the already puffed up. There is probably a hotel or some other real estate deal waiting to be bargained for by this guy. He has no real urge to help anyone other than himself. Do not be fooled. It is interesting how he uses world affairs to change the subject but it will not work forever. Once a liar always a liar.
19
Why would the Iranians negotiate with Trump? Perhaps they feel they could benefit from the resulting political theatre. None of this president’s international “negotiations” have resulted in anything but theatre. Trump is the “great reneger”. It’s all part of his pattern of cheating. He makes deals he has no interest in honoring and then says the other side can’t be trusted. Trump is the one who can’t be trusted. He cheats on contracts related to his real estate developments, he cheats at golf, he’s cheated on all of his wives, and the beat goes on. That’s his art of the deal, to reneg on deals and create political theatre.
27
Why would Trump treat Iran the same as Afghanistan or North Korea? The Taliban and Kim Jong Un don't have oil.
3
I seem to remember the GOP disparaging President Obama because he considered sitting down with our enemies and talking...what happened to that now, GOP?
“Forcing crisis after crisis is a tactic, one that the Trump administration deploys on fronts both foreign and domestic.”
This guy is a dumpster fire EVERY DAY. I wake up in the morning never knowing what later will be on my iPad that may cause the end to democracy as we know it. I wouldn’t trust The Groper and his cronies to begin faith for anything, no less peace with our friends and enemies. It’s so sad that I believe not one word any of them say!
21
Wow, even the NYT Editorial Board is open to the potential benefits (as well as drawbacks) of Trump's behavior.
We live in interesting times indeed.
8
Here is the problem with this school of thought, as long as the "supreme leader" of Iran isn't in the room, nothing of significance will be accomplished. Pigs will fly before that man will meet with Trump.
7
Are you kidding? Israel and its supporters will never allow any rapprochement with Iran.
16
Trump, Ahmadinejad, Putin, and Kim Jong Un are all bullies. They might understand each other well. A leader who is thougtful and reserved, and not accustomed to dealing with bullies, might be at a disadvantage in dealing with people like this. Better to let your diplomats work things out, then go for the signing and the photo shoot.
5
Oh, and one more thing in common. They both became president through basically falsified and undemocratic elections!
16
"The administration is talking to the Taliban and North Korea. Why not Iran? "
Because the other two are not (yet) on Israels hit list?
11
Ahmadinejad has watched and knows the way to handle trump is to flatter him. Your article doesn't mention that at all. trump is the problem and he started all this. I keep reading about Iran's provocations but trump started all this and through sanctions has kept it going. If you want peace in the Gulf, go back to the agreement and lift the sanctions.
If you want to negotiated beyond the agreement, do it.
trump believes he can force everyone to his way of thinking. Yes, Europe has to keep opposing him on many fronts. Once they give in, he will just get worse.
24
So, let me get this straight- broad view- tRump creates a problem, then says- hey I can solve this problem. Is that about right?
31
Well, Mr DinnerJacket has already learned one thing and that is to praise the donald for his self-professed genius.
There is value in talking. No question and diplomatic avenues must be pursued.
If Mr Trump is able to actually negotiate some of value, and not of political expedience to himself, the perhaps his administration will not be the complete abject failure it is shaping up to be.
4
Traditional diplomacy is the political equivalent of Kabuki theater. It appears to prohibit the social interactions needed to advance peace.
In particular, a common diplomatic phase is “the president cannot meet with Mr. TBD because it gives Mr. TBD power”.
It is a cruel and ironic twist of fate that our most inept and morally bankrupt president is the first to ignore this type of obstructive “wisdom”.
6
@Bongo
The reason why all big international diplomatic victories were sealed by a handshake of the leaders of all countries involved, who did NOT meet in public before the agreement had been obtained, is because public meetings are necessarily caught up in the game of politics that each leader is playing at home, whereas REAL negotiations need a quiet, serene climate, where diplomats and experts can work together behind the scenes, in all respect and far away from sensational journalists and their cameras.
A peace agreement ONLY works when both leaders can claim victory in front of their supporters and citizens. Once it is written and signed, presidents CAN give their own interpretation without endangering peace itself, BECAUSE the agreement has been signed and is now the law of the land.
That is why presidents never meet in public before a deal is done, you see?
What you call "traditional diplomacy" is the very opposite of "Kabuki theater". It's what has prevented WWIII for more than half a century, remember?
What IS "Kabuki theater", however, are photo-ops between leaders of hostile countries long before any agreement is reached, because those serve only one goal: to give their own citizens the feeling that they're serious about peace. If you don't add serious diplomacy, however, you're merely betraying your own citizens, as dictators constantly do ...
55
Trump has a strategy? Good luck with getting Pompeo and Bolton to negotiate a peaceful settlement. I've seen this show before. It doesn't end well.
30
I grew up in Jersey and heard Trump’s media flatulence for decades; this included being a regular listener of the Stern show and hearing myriad interviews with Howard and Trump. Most of these interviews were about the B-actresses the Donald claims to have slept with, along with blood curdling anatomical details and hearty male laughter.
That said, let’s give the Trumpster 50% credit for this one. He got us in this mess and MAYBE he talk his way out of it. We’ll see. What a dope he is
41
did Adelson clear this meeting? after all, Trump and the Republicans will need his vast donations.....
20
@Don White While Adelson may financially support Trump and others because he feels they will act in a way that he agrees with, and he no doubt has Trump's ear to the extent that they communicate on occasion. Please show any evidence that Adelson actually dictates or approves policies as your comment implies. Republicans also rely on Koch brother funding. While i don't have the #s I suspect Koch related (direct and indirect) is larger than Adelson's (read "Dark Money" by Jane Mayer) yet Trump and the Kochs are at odds. This would indicate that Trump, for all his many faults, is not a puppet of any particular donor even if there is some influence. Can you cite evidence or reasoned argument to suggest otherwise? Meanwhile, you are promoting, what I believe to be, a specious line of thinking (whether you realize is or not) that is used on both far right and far left to target a certain group and thereby promote hate and prejudice.
2
@ Netanyahu and MBS run our mid-east policy. If you don't know that, you aren't paying attention.
Citing reality is not promoting hate and prejudice.
12
Has Trump really, “been right in recognizing the value of talking directly with one’s adversaries”? Or does he just value the photo opportunities such “talks”provide?
32
@Jonathan Blackstaffe
I think they all clamor for the gravitas and enduring fame of Roosevelt’s December 7 1941’s Pearl Harbor speech,
A New York Times editorial titled "Trump and Ahmadinejad Are Right" certainly provokes attention. Of course leaders should promote talks as opposed to war between their countries. But with all the recent media coverage of the American President's rhetoric and what we know of the former Iranian President's rhetoric (including Holocaust denial) from a decade ago, it is hard to not be cynical. But yes, any talks of peace should be nurtured.
9
Somehow wishful thinking about Trump constantly appears in editorials and pundit opinion pieces. A clear case of hope vs experience. Trump loves grand gestures but has not shown any negotiating ability, it is far from obvious that having him lead negotiations with anyone will result in some benefit to the US. The best we can hope is that his ineptitude will not result in some catastrophe. It is not simply Trump, he has surrounded himself with people that show no better competency or judgement than him. Before the US engages in serious negotiations that have a positive outcome he and his acolytes must be kicked out and replaced with people who know what they are doing.
29
Why not Iran? Let's start with the fact that neither the Taliban nor North Korea are shooting down our drones or intercepting oil tankers.
2
@Joe
Iran only did so after America broke its word and started to add tons of sanctions even when Iran perfectly respected its side of the agreement and for the first time in decades was no longer building nuclear weapons, as proven by our own FBI.
And you seem to ignore that we're at WAR with the Taliban, who not only shoot down our drones but also kill our soldiers ... ?
And that North Korea built nuclear weapons AGAINST an international agreement, AND continues to do missile tests, against what had been agreed upon, including with Trump ... ?
13
@Joe: Nor is the U.S. pulling out of deals already negotiated with the Taliban or North Korea.
5
@Joe And Iran doesn't have war ships loaded with missiles right off our coast They aren't starving our people and they haven't started any wars in our region. We sure can't say the same about the US.
4
Yes, when sensible people sit down to talk beneficial results are likely to occur. Alas, the number of sensible people among the Ayetollah's, the Kim Jung's, the Taliban, and the Trump administration has not been shown to be greater than zero. Still, especially among the insensible, talking is better than shooting. Just hope talking doesn't lead to shouting, which leads to ...
4
Since the Carter administration the US has had a policy of US control over oil access in the Middle East. This has been the rationale for Gulf War's I and II and the disastrous policy of regime change in seven countries.
One wing of the US establishment recognizes that effective control can be indirect. They support the Iran treaty because it effectively blocks Iran's ability to gain a strategic advantage in the region while leaving the US declared limits in place.
The neocon wing wants another war. While wars have created chaos in the region, they haven't produced much blow back directly to the US and they've left Israel as the dominant regional power. They've also generated billions in war spending and so far American monetary policy has had others basically finance these wars.
Trump's reluctance to negotiate with Iran is as the British ambassador said, less ideological than it is personal. Trump hates the idea that this was a signature Obama policy and also wants to curry favor with Israel.
Trump's approach to Middle East policy is dangerous precisely because it's personally driven. Ideological frames are predictable, even if you disagree with them. Idiosyncrasies are not.
Trump vacillates back and forth between these camps with occasional obedience to one or the other. So far this has produced much theater but very little coherent policy or results.
At least we have not started another war, at least not yet. But the trip wires are there and the restraints are not.
22
The best that could come out of a meeting is that the Iranians snooker Trump, the same way as the North Koreans.
However humiliating this outcome might be for American foreign policy establishment, it's in everyone's best interest -- except perhaps the Iranian people, when they see Trump joke it up with the mullahs over state repression.
5
Trump and Ahmadinejad are right, it's better to talk than for Iran to build nuclear weapons and the US to threaten to bomb it?
Here's some good news: Obama and Rouhani not only TALKED about this too, they walked the walk, hired highly competent experts and diplomats, strengthened our relationships with the world's biggest powers and then ACHIEVED de facto denuclearization and no war for the unprecedented period of 15 years - the time to start round 2 of REAL talks, and try to extend the agreement all while starting to address other contentious issues between the two countries.
So after three years of Trump in the White House, the war-mongering GOP and war-mongering Ahmadinejad, who opposed the previous agreement in a very vocal way, now claim that they believe that a diplomatic solution might actually be a good idea ... ?
Wow. Please wake me up when both men finally accept to acknowledge that the 2015 was EXACTLY what they now claim should be tried, hire competent diplomats too, and then start to make some progress too, rather than constantly turning the clock backwards.
43
@Ana Luisa You are spot on! JCPOA effectively addressed the nuclear weapons issue regarding Iran because the P5 plus the EU were committed to honor the agreement. If Iran began to develop nuclear weapons all parties would voluntarily impose sanctions on Iran.
The other issues of concern for Trump are also multilateral and are not bilateral matters to be hashed out between the U.S. and Iran. In fact, if negotiations are conducted outside of the framework of the Security Council prospects for success are dim.
Central to the non-nuclear issues claimed to be a concern for Trump are missiles and Iran's support for forces like the Hezbollah, the Houthi in Yemen and Iran's forces in Syria. Iran supported forces in Syria were crucial to the defeat of ISIS. Iran was not in Syria to threaten Israel. Other conflicts also have a national security and national interest element for Iran. If Iran's national security interests could be guaranteed they would not be fighting in Syria or need missiles or anti-missile defenses. The national security interests of all states in the Middle East need to be addressed including Iran's.
Iran is a founding member of UN COPUOS and a party to the Outer Space Treaty that guarantees all countries the right to peaceful uses of outer space. Iran has the right to launch satellites for peaceful uses of outer space.
If the U.S. fully honored JCPOA much could be done by the 2020 elections that would also benefit Trump. Why not try?
12
Your editorial would be correct if Pres. Trump had demonstrated any diplomatic ability since he took office. Unfortunately all he has done is take the U.S. out of multi-lateral deals, and attempt to bludgeon other countries into "better deals" under the threat of tariff wars. Based on what has occurred during his Presidency, there are two problems: other countries no longer trust him, and he has shown no ability to compromise. So yes, let the Trump Administration negotiate with their Iranian counterparts, but no photo-ops or "look at what I did that Obama didn't" until genuine progress is made.
32
I love it! Ahmadinejad just called Trump out. Perhaps Trump’s diplomatic tactics will bear fruit; perhaps the Donald can create something of substance for once; I doubt it.
9
Makes me nauseous to concede anything to trump, but if the message works I'll live with the messenger for as long as it takes, hopefully not past 2020, when he will be relegated to a prime time spot as a Fox commentator.
9
The reason Trump is not talking to Iran is Saudi Arabia, Iran’s sworn enemy. Trump and Kushner have spent most of their Middle East time currying favor with the murderous Saudi regime, probably in the hope of some financial payoff for themselves after Trump is no longer president. The Saudis are great potential investors for financing-starved Trump projects now “overseen” by Trump Jr., and I would bet half my bank account that there will be a Trump Tower Riyadh announced within two years after he leaves office.
74
"His administration long ago jettisoned the diplomatic protocol against direct talks with North Korea and the Taliban"... and accomplished nothing in either case.
19
The headline and part of this editorial is quite confusing.
No matter what influence Mr. Ahmadinejad still has, any talks involving the very top of each government will most certainly held with President Rouhani, while the ultimate decision of having such talks most certainly rests with the Ayatollah.
And not to forget, the Revolutionary Guard has a lot of influence on Iranian politics, and is hardly pleased to have been defined by the Trump administration as being a terror organization. But then the RG probably doesn't care one iota about Trump's nutty foreign politics.
6
I recall a time when there was an American embassy in Tehran and an Iranian embassy in Washington. That should be the arrangement today. The presence of embassies is not a measure of friendship and/or good will among nations. Embassies are focal points where nations can meet face to face to discuss their grievances. They also serve to assist any of their fellow nationals who happen to be, for whatever reasons, in the nations the embassy is located. Nothing of this sort can be expected as long as Trump is in the White House, of course. For better or worse the whole world must be put on hold until the Trump menace is over. In the mean time all nations should simply bite their lips so-to-speak and pray for the patience to await better days. (I also remember the presence of an Israeli embassy in Tehran.)
14
Why should Iran negotiate with Trump when Trump broke their last agreement? It shouldn't and it won't.
The ball is in Trump's court but he doesn't know how to play ball.
83
Ahmadinejad knows that getting Trump to the negotiating table is a win for Iran, because once talks start there will be no military action, and that the nuclear status quo will be tacitly endorsed (see North Korea). And I expect that the Iranians will ask for, and get, some easing of the sanctions.
Then the game will be to stall the negotiations for as long as possible.
Trump may think of himself as a great negotiator, but has he will be dealing with the real pros of the art of the deal.
13
Ok, talks. It is time, though, for real diplomats to do lots of prep work for those high level 'talks.' Otherwise, what we will continue to get is the grand photo-op events long on bragging rights and very, very short on substance. Iran is a whole different kettle of fish from Kim. A mutual ego-stoking relationship or bromance would not be part of the equation. Trump's main approach is personal schmoozing which he quickly experiences & describes as 'a lot of love.' A vastly different approach will be needed with the Iranians.
Trump got us into this whole mess by pulling out of an agreement which the Iranians were actually keeping - then punishing them as if they were not. We'll see if he can do anything, but if he can it will take much more serious work than he has been willing to do on anything thus far.
41
It depends on what the meaning of talk is.
Trump likes to meet with leaders for a photo op and make believe that substantive talks are going on behind the scenes. This keeps Trump in the headlines while his super hawk representatives (Pompeo and Bolton) set up impossible conditions which will never be met.
It is all theater with Trump and his supporters love the show.
Another Nobel Peace Prize in the offing for our genius President.
65
@Babel Pompeo is now exploring a run for Governor of Kansas and was there a few days ago. He may have inside information that the creep is about to be dismissed and Pompeo may want to save what dignity he has left. He may also be dismissed by his boss and soon.
9
Birds of a feather flock together. Trump and Ahmadinejad are firebrands, populists and opportunists. Both seek a US-Iran rapprochement for political gains and a place in history. Ahmadinejad wants to unseat Hassan Rouhani in 2021. Trump is seeking re-election.
The decades old animosity between Iran and the US won’t go away with a photo-op meeting. Both countries need to overcome mutual distrust through reconciliation, before their leaders meet.
The Trump administration didn’t start talking to the Taliban. It happened under Obama. But Trump is desperate to get out of Afghanistan and lets the Taliban have their way.
Eager to succeed where his predecessors had failed, Trump made overtures to Kim Jong-un to gratify his ego.
Talking to Iran is complicated. It is not ruled by a dynasty, or a tribe. The Supreme Leader is the power broker, but the Revolutionary Guard Corps is Iran’s most powerful security and military institution, holding sway over key economic and political affairs. The IRGC benefits hugely from Western sanctions and opposed to the 2015 deal.
Given his deep-rooted scepticism, the Supreme Leader doesn’t trust the US, let alone Trump, who unilaterally withdrew from the 2015 deal.
Iran has enemies - Israel and Saudi Arabia - that are US allies. Improving Iran-US relations alone wouldn’t end wars in the Middle East. Tensions wouldn’t subside until Riyadh and Tehran could find a way to “share the neighbourhood” and make some kind of peace, according to Obama.
28
@J. von Hettlingen
What is wrong with domestic political opportunism if it leads to world peace?
Time to give Ahmadinejad another chance.
2
"Such a negotiated agreement starts to echo what Mr. Trump has long sought — a grander bargain than President Barack Obama got, one that would address not only the country’s nuclear ambitions but also its work on missile systems and support for regional terrorist organizations."
That's absurd.
Trump didn't even try to build a wall, deport 11 million illegals (he deported and removed LESS illegals than Obama in 2016), get comprehensive immigration reform done (only Obama got such a bipartisan bill through the Senate, in 2013), or repeal and replace Obamacare with something better (he flip-flopped to supporting Ryancare, which did the opposite of what he promised to do, and then couldn't even negotiate that with his own GOP Congress).
So obviously, the notion that somehow Trump would have "long sought" a grand bargain with Iran is entirely false. Yes, he TALKED about this too. But by now we know that his words don't have any value, and that he's all talk, no action.
The only president who TRULY sought a "grand bargain", from the very beginning - and who knew what he was talking about - has been Obama.
His multilateral nuclear agreement (just like Obamacare) was designed to LAY THE FOUNDATION for such a grand bargain.
Before the Iran "deal", Iranian suspicion concerning the mere possibility of the world keeping its word, was too high to get anything done. Thanks to it, the idea was, we would PROVE to be reliable, and THEN could start building on it, which is Trump's job.
97
If he does with Iran what has been done with North Korea, it will be a huge win. Not a complete victory but a huge win.
8
@Brian
You mean that if he "does" with Iran what he did with North Korea (= first sending inflammatory tweets, which remind them of the fact that the US is willing to bomb them, and then asking for a photo-op and tweeting that he won't do so after all), then just like before the Iran nuclear agreement, Iran will continue to build nuclear weapons and North Korea will continue as it did before.
When it comes to North Korea, that simply means maintaining the status quo all while showing its dictator that as long as he accepts photo-ops and keeps his nuclear weapons intact and ready to be fired off, the US will leave it alone.
When it comes to Iran, however, going back to before the agreement means that Iran is now building nuclear weapons again - AND will continue until it has them and the US will no longer ask for anything more than a photo-op.
If you call this a "win" for America, imho you don't understand what a "nuclear threat" means in the first place ...
53
@Ana Luisa. I hope you can see how flawed the Obama agreement was , which is Iran can restart its nuclear program on demand. The Obama accord only halted nuclear for ten years and we are almost four years into it so what good did it do? A new approach is needed.
7
Actually, almost a measured article until towards the end when it had to reflexively disparage Trump. He's negotiating in a free country with a party and most of the media which would prefer the country's failure to his success. Not easy. But, other countries know, for now, unless he loses in 2020, we going to demand fairness from our friends and fair play from our adversaries. Not that I think his negotiations are always as easy as he thinks, but we are better off coming from a position of strength than whatever that was we did in Obama's administration. Iran took advantage of the previous admin., made us weaker by paying ransoms (everyone knows what they were) and obscuring what it did from the American people. Perhaps they are waiting for an administration that this editorial page would prefer. It would give them an advantage again.
There's no reason any country should not talk to any other country. They do anyway. They just pretend they are not. But, Iran is not going to get us out of the region. Even if it sometimes has to be war, there's no other country or assembly of countries that can keep as much peace.
4
@DHEisenberg
Don't you see how absurd your own comment is?
You really believe that most of the American people (Trump and the GOP just lost the midterm elections with the biggest voter gap in three decades, remember?) would be so stupid as to "prefer the country's failure to his success" ... ?
THAT is where the GOP has poisoned its own supporters' mind.
It demonized Americans who disagree with their policy ideas to such an extent that they can now avoid all real, respectful debates on substance, as their voters won't even THINK about no longer voting for the GOP.
And that, obviously, cannot but weaken this country.
As to Obama: he obtained the very first multilateral denuclearization agreement. That means that he achieved obtaining 15 years of no nuclear weapons from one of our worst foes, Iran. That OBVIOUSLY makes us (and the entire world) stronger, not weaker.
All that Trump obtained for the moment is that Iran took up building nuclear weapons again, and a situation on the verge of war. He also broke America's word to the world. You cannot possible spin that as making us stronger rather than weaker.
And a diplomatic agreement requires not some tweets about potential bombing a country and then some "talking" and photo-ops. It requires a full-fledged US diplomacy effort. How could Trump be up to this task, when he didn't even start hiring diplomats and experts yet, contrary to what all other presidents did ... ?
Any ideas?
10
The former US president Barack Obama being central to the Iran nuclear deal and also the common target of attack for both Trump and Ahemadnejad the suggestion of a possible grander negotiated deal between the US and Iran appears to be convincing provided such a deal erases the legacy mark of Obama and brings Trump and Ahemeginejad to the core of the negotiations with implied polirical dividends and credit to both the discredited leaders always crazy for power, glory, and wealth.
43
@Prof. Jai Prakash Sharma
In other words, with Trump and Ahmadinejad merely wanting a photo-op to send to their by state propaganda brainwashed supporters to make them believe that they achieved something great, that's probably what we will get.
9
For an agreement to work, each side must believe that the other side will keep its promises. This is true regardless of whether the parties are good or evil - see Nietzsche's 'Beyond Good And Evil'.
And that is the heart of the problem: Trump's word is worth NOTHING!
So no-one will negotiate with him.
188
@spindizzy
True. Trump sees nothing wrong or untrustworthy to keep moving the goal posts after agreements have been reached. Trump is a lame duck president and no country sees any reason to sign anything with him knowing that a new leader will add much needed dependability and reliability to America promises. With trump you have nothing dependable.
13
What issues can bring down Trump? War can, especially a war that he provokes. The economy can, especially if it crashes because of his miscalculation.
After a while the public tires of all the crises.
79
Nah... Trump is essentially an isolationist. He doesn't want wars with anyone and has been withdrawing our troops wherever he can. He's essentially a deal maker. The strategy is completely cripple and squeeze the Iranians with sanctions then hope that they dismantle their desire for a nuclear weapon. I think it's working very effectively. That's why they're starting these little skirmishes in the water they know they can never win trying to goad us into conflict. Trump is very restrained and will continue to be so.
3
@Caveman 007
Never underestimate the power of war, even an illegitimate war initiated by our President, to provoke otherwise rational Americans to abandon reason for jingoism thereby supporting an inept, dishonest President rather than risk the appearance of being unpatriotic. All it takes is a country with a leader that has already been anointed boogeyman.
6
This is not going to happen. The Iranian press, the Foreign Minister and the leader in the legislature have all said they
feel him untrustworthy, biased in favor of Israel. One of them
said he is used to transactional real estate sales, not international negotiation.
We must never forget that Russia and China ( not our friends) are also a major part of the picture and lastly the Europeans have begun to set up a 3rd Party Entity to get around U.S. sanction.
49
Talks would likely deter a war, a golden aim in itself, but as with North Korea, talks would likely produce nothing more. If it gets us past January 20, 2021, I'd be settle for that.
55
Ahmadinejad and Trump engaging in intense negotiations to decide the fate of the middle east and matters of war and peace.
What could go wrong?
156
the 2015 deal was put together to facilitate Iran's return to the community of nations.
Trump pulls out of the deal for no sound reasons.
He simply needed the attention.
So long as Israel is around, Iran will not have nuclear weapons.
20
@Oscar Valdes
In real life, Iran WAS building nuclear weapons before the 2015 multilateral agreement, then de facto stopped doing so for 4 years, and now that Trump unilaterally pulled out, started to build them again.
ONLY when a Democrat sits in the White House is it safe for Iran to have no nuclear weapons at hand. As soon as a Republican takes over, they know that the ONLY thing that will prevent the US from slaughtering the Iranian people is to have nuclear bombs and point them towards Israel.
Trump has just proven this to be true once again, with his approach to North Korea.
Once you have nuclear weapons, all that he'll ask from you is a nice photo-op, allowing you and him to make supporters believe that they achieved peace. And then each continues with his own business, just like it was before.
11
@Oscar Valdes Israel is not at issue. Saudi is.
We have fought two wars for Saud, one after they attacked us.
Iran is a direct threat to Saudi hegemony of the ME.
Israel is not the central reason for 100% of the policies of the US, no matter what one believes
9
@Oscar Valdes or alternatively so long as Israel has nuclear weapons and throws it weight around, others may seek nuclear weapons?
2
"Mr. Ahmadinejad appears to have greater faith in Mr. Trump’s wisdom than might seem to be justified by other diplomatic negotiations the president has undertaken."
Mr. Ahmadinejad recognizes Mr. Trump's inherent weakness to bluff and bluster in the media before giving away the store in face to face meetings. The Iranians will hustle Trump like a patsy.
230
@Mike
100% agreed. I'd love to see some coverage (*ahem* NYT *ahem*) about the possibility (probability?) that trump is getting played for a fool in his foreign engagements. I say this not in the vein of spectator sport, but in the interest of US citizens (of which I'm one) who will directly bear the consequences.
20
@Mike
Are you kidding? Trump is squeezing all the life out of the Iranians with all the sanctions. They're totally crippled. That's why they're starting little skirmishes in the water so the radical clerics in charge can show the common folk they're standing up to the enemy. Problem is we can destroy their little toy navy in about 20 seconds. The Iranians desperately want to go back to the Iran Deal. It's very simple - prove to us that you've given up your nuclear program and we will lift the sanctions and everybody can go on and have a normal life. Trump is morally right and strong to confront the biggest instigator and supporter of terorism in the Middle East. They are plain evil, at least the radical regime is and they're holding their poor people hostage to their radical murderous ideology. Trump is saying enough and he's absolutely right.
4