President Trump abruptly invited Iranian leaders to “call me” to strike a “fair deal” blocking nuclear development on May 12, but experts say there’s unlikely to be a repeat of the president’s world-captivating handshake with Kim Jong Un.
Recent White House advisers don’t expect Trump to sit down with Ayatollah Ali Khamenei or Iranian President Hassan Rouhani, due to intense resistance in both governments.
“As much as we might think it would be smart and clever for Iran to try and pick up the phone and begin a North Korea-like process, it’s not politically feasible for Iran,” said Eric Brewer, Trump’s former director for counterproliferation at the White House National Security Council. North Korea resembles an absolute monarchy, whereas elected officials in Iran share power with clerics who led the anti-American 1979 revolution.
“The problem isn’t whether or not the Iranians have Trump’s number, but rather that, given U.S. demands, there’s not much to discuss from the Iranian perspective,” Brewer said. “What the United States is asking for is nothing short of capitulation and would force Iran to do a 180 on policies it has seen as critical to its defense and identity for decades.”
[Related: China signals plan to flout US sanctions on Iranian oil]
Trump has badly hurt Iran’s economy with sanctions, which followed his withdrawal last year from the Obama-era nuclear pact with the nation. This month, he coupled his invite for talks with new sanctions on metals industries as the Pentagon deployed an aircraft carrier nearby.
“Unlike North Korea, which long sought the legitimization that the Trump-Kim summit conferred, Iranian leaders view personal engagement with the U.S. as risky,” said Mike Singh, managing director at the Washington Institute and a former policy adviser to President George W. Bush.
“Trump seems genuinely eager to engage … whereas I imagine there is greater skepticism among his officials,” Singh said. “In Iran, the situation is reversed. Working-level officials seem open to engagement with the U.S., but Iran’s supreme leader has inveighed against it.”
Singh said veto-wielding Khamenei rebutted Trump’s invitation to call, saying talks with the U.S. are “double poison,” meaning any engagement “will likely have to begin at the working level, or be conducted via a third party.”
[Also read: Government raises oil price forecast in response to Iran sanctions]
Although Trump’s son-in-law and adviser Jared Kushner is said to favor talks, an outside supporter of the idea, National Iranian American Council President Jamal Abdi, said Trump is surrounded by many skeptics.
“There are powerful political organizations and interests in Washington that will fight negotiations tooth and nail,” Abdi said. “If Trump is serious about negotiations with Iran, he will need to dramatically reshape the principals that surround him, including firing [national security adviser] John Bolton.”
Abdi said that, even then, Iranian leaders may not want to be seen with Trump. Rouhani, he noted, “only held a phone call with Obama” after deciding against meeting in person at the United Nations in New York.
Rouhani was hurt domestically when Trump dumped the deal, Abdi added.
Supporters of a harder line, meanwhile, are hopeful Trump will be wary.
“Any time you have the executive making a statement about reaching out to the Iranians, it makes me a little nervous,” said David Ibsen, president of United Against Nuclear Iran, who expressed comfort in the fact that fellow hawks Bolton and Secretary of State Mike Pompeo are in their roles.
Ibsen said even midlevel talks may not be feasible, as Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif recently made TV appearances seen as “trying to drive a wedge between Trump and Bolton,” questioning whether Bolton was out of line with Trump’s views.
The White House and Iran’s foreign ministries did not respond to inquiries.
Michael Doran, who worked on Iran policy in the Bush White House, opposes talks but said it’s possible Iran would see an upside in appearing interested. “Their goal, I still believe, is to get to the 2020 U.S. presidential election in one piece, with the hopes that Trump will then be replaced,” he said.
Mark Lijek, a U.S. diplomat in Iran who escaped during the 1979-1981 hostage crisis, is doubtful of progress, but he is also intrigued.
“For Iranians, we are the great Satan, and one does not normally sit down with the devil,” Lijek said. “If the Iranians were to agree, I doubt it would lead to a deal in the near term. But it would be such a dramatic change from the rhetoric of three decades that, who knows, it might just break something loose.”
