Will Iran be Donald Trump’s Ukraine? For the moment, there is no question of it. The American president is even in a hurry to put an end to it. In eight months, there are the mid-term elections which, if he loses, will put his presidency in jeopardy. So, in front of a few journalists gathered on the tarmac of an airport, he blurted out: “I will manage the Strait of Hormuz with the ayatollah. » Delusional statement. How can he manage the strait? Iran has its hands in it. He began charging $2 million per ship allowed to pass, payable in yen. And then which ayatollah is Trump talking about? From Mojtaba, the son of the Supreme Guide? Or the mysterious Iranian interlocutor with whom the American president claims to be negotiating, but whose name he does not want to reveal, for fear, he says, of being eliminated by the Israelis?
After giving Iran an ultimatum to reopen the strait, Trump backtracked, suddenly speaking of “very fruitful and constructive discussions with a view to a complete and definitive settlement of our hostilities in the Middle East”. Immediately, on the course of the Brent, it’s a cold shower. The barrel which flirted with 110 dollars on Tuesday fell to 90 in the evening. In late February, Trump made similar statements about the negotiations, before attacking Iran. He has a survival instinct precisely when faced with the chaos he causes. But with the crisis in the Strait of Hormuz, Trump is facing what looks like a trap. Tehran, in fact, is now exerting disastrous pressure on the global economy in areas ranging from fuels to fertilizers, including liquid helium and drinking water.
A drone on the desalination plants of the Gulf countries, it is their survival that is at stake. Thursday March 19, an Iranian strike on the first gas liquefaction plant in the world, at Ras Laffan in Qatar, demonstrated that we had moved from a phase of blockage to a much more delicate phase of degradation of the production tool. If the economies of the Gulf countries are wiped out, it will be a terrible blow to the credibility of the United States. Three of these countries, Emirates, Qatar and Saudi Arabia, had committed to investing up to $3 trillion in the American economy over ten years. Let’s be clear, this promise has gone up in smoke. The Emirates even suffered more missile and drone attacks than Israel during the conflict. Hence the feeling, which adds to a tenacious hatred against Iran, their aggressor, that these countries trusted the Americans and that the latter, in return, left them alone while they defended Israel.
The Venezuelan model
For the moment, the price of oil has experienced bouts of fever, but it fluctuates around 100 dollars. Not catastrophic. Not yet. But time is running out. And Trump is getting impatient. Hence his frantic desire to end the conflict, moving from a demand for capitulation to announcing the end of the war, then to the threat of destruction of Iranian power plants. Above all, Trump seems focused on what his advisers at the White House call the “Venezuelan model”. This tool specific to Trumpian diplomacy consists of designating a successor to the person you wish to get rid of. The Maduro precedent worked so well that Trump intends to apply it to Iran, even if little brings the two countries together.
Tehran puts pressure on the global economy
Initially, the name of Ali Larijani, head of Iranian security and veteran diplomat well known to Westerners, was favored by Trump. Until an Israeli missile took him out of the equation. From now on, his preference goes to Mohammed Ghalibaf, the head of Parliament. The problem is that neither of these two men, Larijani during his lifetime and Ghalibaf today, has shown the slightest willingness to negotiate with the Americans. The latter also speaks of “fake news designed to manipulate oil markets”. Proof, however, that it is him that Trump wants, the Wall Street Journal reports that the Americans pressured the Israelis to remove his name and that of Abbas Araghchi, the foreign minister, from the Israeli list of leaders to be killed. Reason given: they are the last leaders able to negotiate. After their death, Iran will be handed over to diehard guardians. There will be no more negotiations. Israel would have accepted… for four days.
Another problem which makes the opening of negotiations delicate: the demands of the two camps are now the polar opposites of what they were before February 28, the date of entry into the war. The mediator is no more either. Oman was struck on its soil by Iran, a very unfair fate given the efforts made by the sultanate to bring the Iranians back into the comity of nations. None of the other Gulf countries could arbitrate, although Qatar tried to volunteer due to its proximity to Iran. This was before the strikes on Ras Laffan. Since then, Doha has claimed its neutrality. Hence the arrival of new players, at the forefront of which are Egypt, Turkey but especially Pakistan. On the American side, the name of JD Vance as a possible negotiator has surfaced. His discretion since the start of the conflict has been interpreted as disapproval due to non-interventionist views expressed in the past. He is also one of the rare members of the administration to be critical of Israel. The Israeli newspaper Hayom reveals a heated phone call in recent days with Benjamin Netanyahu. Vance reportedly accused the Israeli prime minister of arguing that a popular uprising would, if intervened, bring about the fall of the Iranian regime.
First proposals
If JD Vance returns to the forefront, it is also because the Iranians have said that they no longer accept the presence of Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner. Twice, first in June 2025 and then last February, the negotiation with them led to an attack by Iran while it was still in progress. The arrival with fanfare of the Marines and elements of the 82nd Airborne could suggest a repetition of the same scenario. We open a negotiation and, in the middle, the Americans arrive. Ground intervention is already qualified as “final blow”a vocabulary reminiscent of… Vietnam. General McChrystal, former commander in chief in Afghanistan, is skeptical about it: “If you like this war, enjoy this part. Everything after will be more difficult. » He’s not the only one who thinks so…
America needs Iran more from this negotiation
On Wednesday, fifteen American proposals were transmitted to Iran via Pakistan. They provide for a lifting of sanctions accompanied by international support for a strictly civilian nuclear program, in exchange for a complete and verified freeze of its sensitive nuclear capabilities, under international supervision and with the dismantling of certain key installations. Suffice to say that with such a document, it will be difficult, regardless of Donald Trump, to speak of an American and Israeli victory in this conflict. But anyway, Iran has already rejected it. However, Trump still extended the deadline for negotiations until April 5.
Behind the fog of war, both sides have an interest in keeping an open channel. Trump may mock the Iranian Supreme Leader by saying that “It’s the job in the world that no one wants”the Iranians mock these Americans who “negotiate with themselves”each party scrutinizes the other. In the middle, much more than Trump’s assertions that the war is already won and the testosterone surges of Secretary of War Pete Hegseth, JD Vance’s announced trip to Pakistan would represent a turning point. Will it take place? If so, until then the United States said: we set the conditions, you accept or we strike. From now on, the Iranians choose with whom they will negotiate and the place where the negotiation will take place, the Israeli and American bombs can continue to fall, the 82nd airborne division can deploy. The return of JD Vance proves one thing: America needs this negotiation more than Iran.
Time has become Tehran’s ally. Trump cannot survive the midterm elections with such low popularity. A Reuters-Ipsos poll puts her at 36% approval. Another published by the Pew Research Center shows that 61% of Americans disapprove of his conduct of the war. It’s time to find a way out that makes him emerge, from his point of view, a winner. Iran is not concerned by such imperatives. The country is no stranger to power outages and deprivations: it has been under embargo since 1979. The asymmetry is no longer just military, it has become political.
