President Trump’s announcement that he had decided to pursue negotiations with Iran over its nuclear program, while disclosing that initial diplomatic steps were underway, came as a surprise to many. After months of aggressive rhetoric and a steady buildup of military posturing, most observers had grown convinced that open conflict was imminent. However, this sudden pivot to diplomacy revealed a more nuanced and strategic layer to Trump’s approach: a preference for resolution through strength, and a willingness to negotiate from a position of power rather than plunge into war.
For those familiar with the deeper logic of Trump’s foreign policy, this shift was entirely consistent. President Trump is a daring dealmaker who favors bold engagement backed by leverage. His strategy centers on applying intense pressure—economic, political, and rhetorical—to force adversaries into negotiations while leaving open the possibility of armed intervention only as a last resort. Trump’s decision to talk with Iran signals a calculated move to achieve meaningful concessions without causing unnecessary bloodshed and destruction. Indeed, his avoidance of war, especially in a volatile region like the Middle East, should be recognized as both pragmatic and principled.
Nuclear weapons
Now, any serious negotiation with Iran must begin with its nuclear program. The foremost priority is to ensure the complete and irreversible dismantlement of any path to nuclear weaponization. Although Tehran insists that its nuclear efforts are peaceful, its long history of deception and breaches of international agreements tell a different story. The American delegation must demand either a full shutdown of enrichment capabilities or the imposition of an intrusive inspections regime capable of verifying peaceful use beyond any doubt. Failing to do so risks a regional nuclear arms race which would severely weaken global non-proliferation frameworks and likely lead to war.
Proxies
Equally pressing is the dismantling of Iran’s proxy network, which has fueled unrest and violence across the Middle East for decades. Tehran’s Islamist ideology has been exported through armed non-state actors such as Hezbollah in Lebanon, Shiite militias in Iraq, the Houthis in Yemen, and Hamas in Gaza. These proxies have served as instruments of Iranian influence, undermining regional governments and intensifying sectarian strife. Any lasting agreement must address this network directly, with mechanisms to dismantle it, thereby restoring a measure of sovereignty and stability to the nations of the region.
Missiles
Iran’s advancing missile program represents another critical threat that must be confronted. Tehran has continued to develop long-range ballistic missiles capable of carrying substantial payloads—technologies that could, in theory, be paired with a nuclear warhead. These developments destabilize not only the Middle East but also parts of Europe and beyond. A new agreement must include strict limitations on the range, payload, and deployment of these weapons, along with a robust verification system to ensure compliance and prevent the regime from covertly expanding its arsenal.
Involvement in wars
More recently, Iran’s involvement in the Ukraine war has exposed its growing role in global conflict zones. The regime’s provision of drones to Russia, used in attacks on civilian infrastructure, has marked a dangerous extension of its asymmetric warfare capabilities into Europe. This development underscores the urgency of including military exports and foreign interventions in any comprehensive negotiation framework. Iran must be compelled to cease enabling foreign aggression, as its involvement in distant wars threatens international stability and emboldens authoritarian regimes worldwide.
The hope: Integration into the free world
While containing Iran’s immediate threats is necessary, it is not sufficient. The United States must think beyond short-term containment and toward long-term transformation. This requires a broader strategic vision: to reintegrate Iran into the community of free nations. The Islamic Republic, though defiant on the surface, is increasingly hollowed out from within. Economic ruin, institutionalized corruption, and political repression have sapped its legitimacy and alienated the majority of Iran’s population. The regime’s fragility is becoming more apparent by the day.
Most significantly, a generational transformation is underway inside Iran. The country’s youth, who comprise a large section of the population, are disenchanted with theocratic rule and increasingly drawn to the ideals of democracy, secular governance, and cultural openness. This yearning for freedom was brought into sharp focus during the Mahsa Revolution of 2022, when millions took to the streets demanding political and social change. The West, and particularly the United States, must support this organic democratic impulse by extracting concessions from the regime in favor of the Iranian people, as well as pursuing a systematic campaign of cultural diplomacy, technological access, and strategic messaging that empowers Iran’s civil society.
This desire for freedom is not a new phenomenon. Iran has a rich history of pro-Western, democratic aspirations. In the early twentieth century, the Constitutional Revolution sought to establish a modern parliamentary system and curtail monarchic absolutism. Despite brutal suppression under both the Pahlavi regime and the Islamic Republic, a resilient liberal tradition has endured in Iran for over a century. Intellectuals, students, dissidents and ordinary people, both at home and in exile, have preserved the ideals of secularism, civil liberties, and democratic governance, waiting for the moment when change becomes possible.
That moment may be closer than many realize. The collapse of the Islamist regime, while difficult to predict in timing, is increasingly viewed as inevitable due to its internal contradictions and public disillusionment. However, regime change alone, particularly when well-funded authoritarian parties lie in wait to seize power, offers no guarantee of a more favorable outcome. In the absence of a coherent democratic narrative to guide the transition, Iran could easily fall into chaos, inviting renewed dictatorship (of the Right or the Left), factional violence, or civil war. This would have disastrous consequences not only for the Iranian people but also for regional and global stability.
To prevent such an outcome, the United States must play a proactive role in shaping the post-regime future. This means investing in the development and amplification of a democratic alternative: empowering Iran’s civil society to lead a peaceful and pluralistic transition. It is both a moral duty and a strategic imperative for the United States. Only a free Iran can serve as a force for stability in the region and a reliable partner for the West. As such, bringing Iran back into the fold of the liberal international order is a necessity for any vision of enduring peace in the Middle East.
Reza Parchizadeh, PhD, is a political scientist, foreign policy expert, and international affairs specialist. He has written extensively on Iran’s nuclear program and geopolitical ambitions as well as the regional and global responses to Tehran. Parchizadeh has appeared on Al Arabiya, BBC, Fox News, and Radio Israel, and is a regular guest analyst on the U.S. government’s Voice of America.