The American-led isolation of Iran is springing leaks all over. It seems that wherever Iran knocks, everyone answers. Except the United States. Instead, the U.S. continues to close the door, following a long pattern with Iran of undermining its own interests.
In 2016, Bahrain followed Saudi Arabia in cutting ties with Iran. But in 2024, it began to explore following Saudi Arabia in restoring ties with Iran. On March 10, 2023, Iran and Saudi Arabia stunned the world by announcing that China had brokered an agreement “to resume diplomatic relations between them and re-open their embassies and missions.”
A year later, Bahrain’s King Hamad bin Isa Al Khalifa suddenly announced that Bahrain is looking forward to improving relations with Iran and that there was no reason to delay. Then, at the end of June 2024, following a meeting by the foreign ministers of the two countries, Iran and Bahrain announced that they had agreed to create a framework on initiating talks on resuming diplomatic relations. “The two sides,” a statement said, “agreed in this meeting to establish the necessary mechanisms to begin talks between the two countries to study how to resume political relations between them.”
The move is likely to worry the United States for two reasons. The first is that Bahrain is home to the American Fifth Fleet whose security region includes the Gulf, the Red Sea, and the Arabian Sea, including, especially Iran. The second is that, as China played a key role in the re-establishing of diplomatic ties between Iran and Saudi Arabia, so Russia played an intermediary role between Iran and Bahrain. On June 7, Iran revealed that the message Bahrain sent to Iran requesting the re-establishment of diplomatic relations was sent through Russia. The two agreements reveal the growing role of Russia and China in a region once comfortably controlled by the United States.
But Iran’s escape artistry is leading to breakouts beyond the region. In July 2023, Iran was welcomed into the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, an international organization that represents 43% of the world’s population and that will grant Iran top level contact and economic relations with global giants like Russia, China, and India. Two months later, along with Saudi Arabia, Iran was welcomed into BRICS. Like the SCO, BRICS includes Russia, China, and India and represents 41.13% of the world’s population. It accounts for 37.3% of global GDP.
But those are not the only doors Iran is knocking on. Though Iran is often criticized in the West for tightly controlling its elections, the leadership’s hardline choice lost to the reformist candidate Dr. Masoud Pezeshkian. Pezeshkian campaigned on the need to mend relations with the United States and the West. He has gone so far as to call for bypassing intermediaries in favor of direct negotiations. Pezeshkian included Mohammad Javad Zarif, who, as foreign minister under President Hassan Rouhani, played a key role in negotiating the JCPOA nuclear agreement. And, according to Trita Parsi, an Iran expert at the Quincy Institute, Pezeshkian is likely to usher many foreign policy people from the Rouhani administration back into government.
This unexpected development would seem to fortuitously align with American interests. But the Biden administration, seemingly incapable of negotiating with anyone and more committed to enmity with Iran than to de-escalating nuclear tensions, seems bent on undermining its own interest.
At a July 8 press briefing, National Security Communications Advisor John Kirby was reminded that the U.S. has said “that they will negotiate or do diplomacy with Iran when it serves our national interests” by a reporter who then asked, “So, is the U.S. now ready to resume nuclear talks, other talks, or make any diplomatic moves with Iran in light of this new president?”
Without even dedicating any explanation or discussion to the important question, Kirby, in a word, answered, “No.” As he moved on to the next question, the reporter, apparently stunned by the answer, cut in: “Wa- – I’m sorry. ‘No’?” Kirby then expanded on his answer: “Well, your – it seemed like a pretty easy question to answer. No, we’re – we’re not in a position where we’re willing to get back to the negotiating table with Iran just based on the fact that they’ve elected a new president.”
This is not the first time the United States has spurned overtures from Iranian reformists. There is a long history that has often had the dangerous consequence of discrediting the reformist camp and returning hardliners who are more hostile to the U.S. to power. Former reformist presidents Hashemi Rafsanjani, Seyyed Mohammad Khatami, and Hassan Rouhani have all suffered the same fate that seems to await Pezeshkian.
When Rafsanjani offered to exert Iran’s regional influence and intervene to help win the release of American hostages being held in Lebanon, President George H.W. Bush promised that Iran would get something in return because “goodwill begets goodwill.” Instead, the United States sent word that Rafsanjani should expect no American reciprocation. Rafsanjani and the reformists were discredited.
Rafsanjani tried one more time, staying officially neutral when Iraq invaded Kuwait while allowing the U.S. to use Iranian airspace. In return, the U.S. snubbed Iran at the Madrid Peace conference and perpetuated the isolation of Iran.
Reformist President Khatami offered the U.S. the rejection of terrorism, acceptance of a two-state solution, implicit recognition of Israel, aid in the fight against the Taliban and al-Qaeda, and invaluable help in setting up a post-Taliban government in Afghanistan. In return, George W. Bush awarded Iran a seat in the Axis of Evil. Khatami was stunned, and the reformists were discredited.
In 2013, Iranians returned a reformist to power. Hassan Rouhani bet everything on improved relations with the West and negotiations over Iran’s civilian nuclear program. But Rouhani and the reformists were, once again, disgraced and discredited when Donald Trump broke America’s promise and pulled out of the JCPOA nuclear agreement. President Joe Biden’s refusal to return to talks dealt what may be the final blow to the reformists.
Surprisingly, though, the reformists have been resurrected with the election of Pezeshkian. Instead of seizing the opportunity and accepting the invitation to negotiate with Iran and calming a volatile relationship, the U.S. seems to be sticking with its policy of discrediting reformist Iranian presidents and rejecting offers to negotiate a nuclear agreement in favor of a futile policy of attempting to isolate Iran and preserve hostility. Once again, the United States is passing on peace and undermining its own interests in Iran.
Ted Snider is a regular columnist on U.S. foreign policy and history at Antiwar.com and The Libertarian Institute. He is also a frequent contributor to Responsible Statecraft and The American Conservative as well as other outlets. To support his work or for media or virtual presentation requests, contact him at tedsnider@bell.net.
