In Focus delivers deeper coverage of the political, cultural, and ideological issues shaping America. Published daily by senior writers and experts, these in-depth pieces go beyond the headlines to give readers the full picture. You can find our full list of In Focus pieces here.
The United States and Iran concluded talks in Oman on Tuesday over the future of Iran’s nuclear program. The U.S. wants Iran to suspend all enrichment activities and allow a more intrusive international inspection regime.
President Donald Trump said he was “indirectly” involved in the talks, which followed discussions earlier in February. When asked on Fox News, Vice President JD Vance explained that Iran “agreed to meet afterward, but in other ways it was very clear that the president has set some red lines that the Iranians are not yet willing to actually acknowledge and work through.”
Iran says it will return to Oman in two weeks to provide specific proposals in response to U.S. demands. They are playing a very dangerous game.
TOM ROGAN: TRUMP AND RUBIO CAMPAIGN FOR VIKTOR ORBAN, XI’S EUROPEAN PET
With a vast array of U.S. military forces now deployed to and around the Middle East, Iran risks precipitating the very U.S. military attack that it wishes to avoid.
Consider Vance’s rhetoric. Note the vice president’s description of Iran being “very clear” that it remains unwilling to “actually acknowledge” Trump’s “red lines.” Vance is one of the more dovish administration voices on Iran, and with good reason. Still, his language suggests the Trump administration is frustrated with how talks are progressing. For Trump, who values the external perception of his unequaled strength as a prized quality of his presidency, Iran’s prevarication risks appearing to be a personal repudiation of the president’s person.
Time is the key test of seriousness here. If Iran were truly serious about negotiating in good faith on a rapid timeline, its negotiators could get an answer from Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei within 72 hours in relation to U.S. demands. Iran’s belief that it need not agree to the very principle of Trump’s red lines, and also that it can take two weeks to get back to the U.S., is a gamble that Trump will be patient.
The obvious question: Is Iran correct? I do not believe so. Iran likely has less time than it believes.
Yes, Trump clearly wants a diplomatic resolution to Iran’s nuclear challenge. Yes, Iran may yet expedite its diplomatic response. And yes, Trump thrives on being perceived as the world’s greatest peacemaker — and to be fair, his record of peace agreements is impressive. That said, Trump also understands that there is a political cost to being dragged along by Iran. He does not want to appear timid or vulnerable to Iran’s diplomatic manipulation.
Trump himself recently stated that Iran is “typically a very tough negotiator.” He has previously suggested that Iran’s leaders had “played every American president for the past 35 years.” Most importantly, the president has also warned that he will use force against Iran if it does not conclude a swift agreement. That threat finds credibility in Trump’s air strikes on Iran’s nuclear program in June 2025. Prior to those strikes, Trump insisted that he wanted to reach a meaningful agreement. But when Iran prevaricated, Trump smashed the most valuable citadels of Iranian nuclear power.
There’s another reason to believe Trump won’t give Iran two weeks to come back to the table, namely, that the array of U.S. military forces now deployed to the Middle East isn’t just for show.
The U.S. has deployed numerous F-15 and F-16 fighter jet squadrons, a carrier strike group with its sizable air wing, special operations forces, and numerous Navy destroyers and submarines to the Middle East. U.S. B-2 bombers could be launched from their home bases or, as Trump warned on Wednesday, the U.S. air base on the British territory of Diego Garcia.
But we need to remember that deploying these forces is very expensive and uncomfortable. It means relocating not just the strike forces, but their enabling maintenance and other support equipment and personnel. It means holding these forces and personnel at high readiness. It means delaying training exercises and crucial repair and maintenance programs. Critically, it also means denying the availability of these forces for other global contingencies.
Most notably, China — the word conservative commentators are loath to mention as they call for Trump to order regime-change-focused military action in Iran. This is for good reason. They do not want to admit the basic truth that the U.S. military cannot simultaneously do everything everywhere. Deploying forces in one area opens security gaps in another. It thus invites a growing appetite for aggression by other adversaries. That matters with the regime change option in Iran. After all, pursuing it wouldn’t just require 1,000 to 10,000 U.S. boots in Iran — it would also expend highly finite munitions that would be critical to any U.S. war with China but which could not be replaced for years.
Trump will want a resolution to the Iran situation far sooner than later. In that regard, it is highly notable that Trump has not issued one of his favored deadlines for Iran to reach an agreement.
TOM ROGAN: THE US AND ISRAEL HAVE DIFFERENT OBJECTIVES IN IRAN
I’ll be the first to admit that nothing is certain.
Yet, Trump’s rhetoric, his Iran record, and the U.S. military buildup also indicate he will order military strikes within the next two weeks against Iran’s nuclear and ballistic missile programs. Rightly, however, he is unlikely to order strikes that seek regime change.
