The Trump administration is once again accusing Iran of building up its nuclear and non-nuclear weaponry. It comes as the third round of indirect talks between the US and Iranian officials have begun in Geneva. James M. Dorsey, from the S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies has more on TRT World. Transcript [Anchor] Okay, let’s get analysis now from James Dorsey, who’s in Singapore. He’s an adjunct senior fellow at S. Rajarathnam School of International Studies. Welcome, James. When I think back to last year, it feels like it was a different world. The US claimed it had destroyed Iran’s nuclear facilities. It seemed like it was, you know, everything was basically done and dusted at that point. Now, it feels like there is this urgency to get Iran to acquiesce to its demands. How have we gone from this all being done to suddenly now this urgency they need to give into the US right now? Why the urgency? [James M. Dorsey] The question is whether Donald Trump has boxed himself into a corner. You have on the one hand, the Iranian position, which is willing to negotiate and willing to some degree to make concessions. But at the same time, its failure to cave into Donald Trump’s demands effectively amounts to a challenging of a basic cornerstone of Trump’s foreign policy, which is the belief that you can bully, coerce or intimidate other countries into bowing to your will. On top of that, you have the contradiction, of course, between a significant military buildup in the Middle East, and Trump’s statements that he prefers a negotiated solution, a negotiated solution meaning Iran capitulates. And then the third element in all of this is that Trump, in a sense, yesterday in his State of the Union speech, by saying Iran has not said it will not have nuclear weapons, in effect is leaving himself a few choices, given that Iran has been very clear in its statements that it does not intend and does not want to have a nuclear weapon. [Anchor] Again, it’s this urgency. So I mean, Iran gives the impression it wants to go to the negotiating table and discuss this. It’s not likely to develop nuclear weapons overnight. Is the United States not willing to just sit down and let the negotiations play out? [James M. Dorsey] That’s, again, that’s the big question. What Trump wants is a total surrender by Iran. He’s not going to get that. And Iran is going to take the risk of a military conflagration. Now, fact of the matter is that fundamentally, neither Iran nor Trump wants a military confrontation. And so I think what you might see coming out of these talks today is not so much an agreement, or a breakdown, but some formula to prolong the talks, and at the same time have managed escalation, if you wish. [Anchor] He’s making lots of threats, Donald Trump, of carrying out military action. But it doesn’t seem like public sentiment at home is necessarily in favour of that. And Trump’s approval ratings are not good at all. Can he actually take that risk, do you think, of instigating a conflict with Iran, you know, considering the harm it might do him at home? [James M. Dorsey] I think what you also saw yesterday in the State of the Union, given that his polling is very low, among the lowest until now, is the fact that Trump is betting on his Make America Great Again support base. In fact, his speech yesterday was targeting his support base, rather than Americans at large. So he may very well feel that he can afford a military conflagration, particularly if he’s able to claim significant success. [Anchor] James, great to speak to you. Thank you. James Dorsey, Adjunct Senior Fellow at the S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies. [James M. Dorsey] Neil, always a pleasure. Thank you. The Turbulent World with James M. Dorsey is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. Thank you for joining me today Your support and loyalty mean a lot to me. It allows me to maintain and expand this column and podcast. Without subscribers like you, I would not be able to offer an original perspective to an ever more important discussion of what the world should and will look like in the 21st century with a focus on the Middle East and the Muslim world in evolving geopolitics. The Washington Post’s recent decimation of its journalistic staff, including many foreign correspondents in the Middle East and elsewhere, increases the importance of contributions made by independent reporters and analysts. They matter now more than ever. Building on decades as a foreign correspondent, my column and podcast has produced for the past 15 years fact-driven, independent reporting and uncompromising, independent analysis of geopolitics, the politics of sports, and the politics of defining Islam in the 21st century. To do so, I need your continued support. Please consider donating or becoming a paid subscriber and suggesting to your friends and colleagues to do the same. You can do so by clicking here. Thank you and best wishes. You're currently a free subscriber to The Turbulent World with James M. Dorsey. For the full experience, upgrade your subscription. © 2026 James M. Dorsey |