The Illusion of Toughness
In a high-stakes dance of diplomacy and brinkmanship, Iran’s Supreme Leader is not engaging in genuine negotiation but is instead playing a dirty game. Unlike traditional back-and-forth bargaining, the current Iranian strategy is built on deception. One probable scenario involves Iran using timing to sidestep the snap-back mechanism of the JCPOA, posing unique challenges for President Trump’s administration in his second term. At the heart of this tactic lies a deliberate display of unyielding strength. By vocally dismissing any inherent benefits in negotiating with the United States—especially under the shadow of President Trump’s aggressive posture—Khamenei forces his adversary to confront a seemingly uncompromising opponent. This is not merely about hardening negotiations; it is a calculated manoeuvre designed to push the opposing camp towards an overreliance on military options or overly aggressive diplomatic moves.
A Tactical Pivot: Softening at the 11th Hour
Yet, beneath this veneer of unwavering defiance lies a more nuanced plan. When the pressure mounts and the risk of triggering the snap-back mechanism looms large, a shift occurs. Khamenei, through his trusted lieutenants—most notably former Foreign Minister Javad Zarif—signals a sudden willingness to engage. This last-minute pivot, often termed the “Time Factor”, is not a genuine concession but rather a calculated delay tactic. By waiting until the very edge of a critical deadline, Iran ensures that any premature move by the U.S. or its European allies—such as triggering snap-back sanctions—would irreversibly collapse the negotiation framework. In essence, Iran is playing a double game: outwardly adopting a hard-line stance to force its opponent into a defensive posture, yet covertly manoeuvring to keep the negotiation door ajar just enough to sow uncertainty.
The Snap-Back Mechanism: A Double-Edged Sword
Central to this chess match is the JCPOA’s snap-back mechanism—a clause designed to reimpose sanctions if Iran deviates from its commitments. For Iran, activating this mechanism is a risk too costly to entertain. By carefully controlling the timing of its concessions, Iranian leaders compel their adversaries to weigh the immediate benefits of aggressive actions against the longer-term strategic advantage of maintaining a dialogue. Should the U.S. or European powers trigger the snap-back, they would not only stifle any budding discussion but also forfeit the possibility of further engagement once the window of opportunity closes.
The Strategic Use of Time
Time, in this context, is not merely a passive backdrop but an active tool. Khamenei’s deliberate delay tactic serves a dual purpose: it buys precious time for internal recalibration while compelling the U.S. and its European allies to remain engaged until the snap-back deadline is surpassed. Once that critical threshold is exceeded, Iran reserves the right to walk away from the table. This calculated use of time forces the U.S. and its European counterparts into a diplomatic quandary. Their decision-making process becomes a balancing act: act too quickly and risk ending a dialogue that might yet yield concessions; act too slowly, and they could be left facing an opponent who, after a display of initial intransigence, has already reset the board in its favour.
Implications for Future Diplomacy
Iran’s latest manoeuvre is a stark example of strategic ambiguity. By refusing to engage in genuine, transparent negotiations, Khamenei not only maintains domestic and regional leverage but also complicates the policy calculus of his adversaries. This tactic—while undeniably dirty—is a reminder that in modern geopolitics, deception rewrites the rules of engagement: those who control the narrative—and, crucially, the clock—hold power. As negotiations hover on the brink of collapse or renewal, the world watches to see if the U.S. and its European partners can adapt to this game of timing and perception. For now, Iran’s supreme leadership demonstrates that the art of deception is not about immediate concessions but about the strategic use of time to corner one’s opponent.
Precautions for President Trump
For President Trump—celebrated for his deal-making bravado—this murky manoeuvring poses significant challenges. Crucially, however, it should be recognised that the traditional tool of negotiation may simply not be available in this arena. Key lessons and precautions include:
• Read the Signals: The dirty tactics employed by the Islamic Republic are designed to provoke a calculated reaction. Instead of expecting that conventional negotiation tactics will work, the administration must acknowledge that the negotiation table is rigged. This realisation should prompt a search for alternative strategies rather than trying to out-negotiate an opponent who is playing a fundamentally different game.
• Rethink the Deal-Maker Brand: While President Trump’s reputation as a shrewd negotiator is well established, clinging to this legacy by forcing negotiations in a context rigged with deceptive manoeuvres could prove counterproductive. The focus should shift towards recognising the limitations of the negotiation framework and exploring solutions outside the realm of traditional dialogue.
• Strategic Patience Over Impulsive Action: The Ayatollah’s interim success in temporarily neutralising the snap-back mechanism might appear as a victory, but it also signals that time is the true tool being wielded. Rather than expecting an effective negotiation outcome where none exists—akin to expecting a fish to climb a tree—Trump’s team must consider alternative approaches that do not rely on the conventional negotiation paradigm.
• Prepare for Alternative Solutions: Ultimately, if the negotiation table is compromised by dirty tactics and dangerous timelines, then clinging to it may lead to an unfavourable outcome. The administration should be prepared to pivot towards alternative strategies that bypass the rigged negotiation framework entirely, ensuring that U.S. interests are safeguarded without falling into an inescapable trap.
Beyond the Fantasy
In my earlier exploration of the “Trump, the Mullahs, and the Iran Negotiation Fantasy”, the focus was on the multifaceted challenges of engaging with the Islamic Republic—a venture fraught with ideological, political, and geopolitical complexities. The lessons from past appeasement failures illustrate the inherent difficulties of diplomacy with the Mullahs, whose manipulative tactics continue to undermine the credibility of any negotiation. This follow-up highlights a crucial evolution: rather than portraying an Iranian mastermind, we now witness a blunt display of dirty tactics that could very well backfire. The short-term removal of the snap-back constraint might seem like a win for the Ayatollah, but it is a double-edged victory that leaves Iran exposed in the long term. For President Trump’s administration, this is a critical juncture—a moment where precision and prudence are paramount. It is essential to recognise that negotiation as a tool is not available and that sooner rather than later, alternative solutions must be explored outside the confines of traditional diplomacy.
Trump has already tarnished his deal-maker reputation by even considering negotiations with the Mullahs. The true peril now lies in further missteps—particularly in missing the critical snap-back trigger—which could erode his carefully crafted brand beyond repair. Ultimately, the stakes are too high for any error. As the world watches, the coming days will reveal whether the Trump administration can abandon a compromised negotiation framework in favour of innovative, alternative strategies that safeguard U.S. interests and restore confidence in his legacy as a shrewd negotiator. Any additional miscalculation risks irreparably undermining the very image that has defined his political career.
Mehran Mossadegh is an expert negotiator and strategic thinker, the founder of NegotiationWise and has written further on the P5+1 and Iran negotiations below. He holds a masters in commercial law from Monash University and a bachelor of Engineering from University of Technology, Sydney.
