quote: Iran's economy is in very bad shape. It was struggling long before the war, and the conflict has only made matters worse. But the key question is: what is the alternative for the current Iranian leadership? Surrender? Economic pressure alone is not going to convince Tehran to abandon control over the Strait of Hormuz, give up its missile program, or accept limits on uranium enrichment that it views as incompatible with its core interests. Iran would almost certainly welcome a return to a negotiated framework, provided it reflects Tehran's interpretation of the previous memorandum of understanding and delivers meaningful sanctions relief. But it is highly unlikely to trade what it sees as its strategic assets and ideological principles for economic benefits alone. That is why economic pressure, by itself, is unlikely to provide Washington with a viable path out of the Iran dilemma. Without a political strategy that addresses Iran's core security calculations, sanctions alone are unlikely to produce the outcome the administration seeks. More broadly, there is no silver bullet to the Iran challenge. If Tehran feels cornered, its instinct is far more likely to be escalation than capitulation. In principle, the Iranian leadership does not want an endless war. The broad support that the previous memorandum of understanding received, even among influential figures within the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, demonstrated that there is genuine interest in a negotiated outcome. But from Tehran's perspective, the United States is no longer simply seeking concessions. It is trying to strip Iran of what the regime views as one of its most important strategic achievements from the war. Under those circumstances, the leadership is unlikely to back down. Despite severe economic pressures, it will almost certainly choose to absorb additional costs rather than surrender what it considers core national security interests. Any U.S. strategy built on the assumption that mounting pressure alone will force Iran to yield risks misunderstanding how Tehran calculates costs, risks, and strategic priorities. #iran | This debate misses the point.  Of course Iran’s leaders don’t want their country bombed, and of course they want sanctions relief. That was never the question. The question is whether they are willing to trade what they see as core interests for either. As the past weeks have shown, they are not, and neither more bombing nor more sanctions will change that.

quote: Iran's economy is in very bad shape. It was struggling long before the war, and the conflict has only made matters worse. But the key question is: what is the alternative for the current Iranian leadership? Surrender? Economic pressure alone is not going to convince Tehran to abandon control over the Strait of Hormuz, give up its missile program, or accept limits on uranium enrichment that it views as incompatible with its core interests. Iran would almost certainly welcome a return to a negotiated framework, provided it reflects Tehran's interpretation of the previous memorandum of understanding and delivers meaningful sanctions relief. But it is highly unlikely to trade what it sees as its strategic assets and ideological principles for economic benefits alone. That is why economic pressure, by itself, is unlikely to provide Washington with a viable path out of the Iran dilemma. Without a political strategy that addresses Iran's core security calculations, sanctions alone are unlikely to produce the outcome the administration seeks. More broadly, there is no silver bullet to the Iran challenge. If Tehran feels cornered, its instinct is far more likely to be escalation than capitulation. In principle, the Iranian leadership does not want an endless war. The broad support that the previous memorandum of understanding received, even among influential figures within the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, demonstrated that there is genuine interest in a negotiated outcome. But from Tehran's perspective, the United States is no longer simply seeking concessions. It is trying to strip Iran of what the regime views as one of its most important strategic achievements from the war. Under those circumstances, the leadership is unlikely to back down. Despite severe economic pressures, it will almost certainly choose to absorb additional costs rather than surrender what it considers core national security interests. Any U.S. strategy built on the assumption that mounting pressure alone will force Iran to yield risks misunderstanding how Tehran calculates costs, risks, and strategic priorities. #iran | This debate misses the point.  Of course Iran’s leaders don’t want their country bombed, and of course they want sanctions relief. That was never the question. The question is whether they are willing to trade what they see as core interests for either. As the past weeks have shown, they are not, and neither more bombing nor more sanctions will change that.

Source:https://x.com/staunovo/status/2082011149973803408