Brinkmanship and the Forsaken

What would be the point of a strike ordered by Trump? Are we to believe it would put an end to the repression raining down on Iranian protesters? In reality, no one is in a position to halt the reprisals that the Revolutionary Guards are inflicting upon their fellow citizens. And even if an agreement were concluded in Oman to avert an American military operation, nothing suggests that civil peace would immediately take hold.

In either case—whether the mullahs reach a cut-rate understanding with the United States or not—the Iranian protest movement will be left to the ferocity of a so-called “pacification” that fires live ammunition at point-blank range at demonstrators and other opponents.

 “Brinkmanship” and “Misreading”

In Oman, beginning Friday, February 6, representatives of Donald Trump and those of Massoud Pezechkian came face to face—two masters of bluster and theatrics: the former, who boasts loudly yet hesitates to carry out his threats; the latter, who, adopting maximalist positions, demanded that the venue of the conference deciding the fate of the Persian Gulf be transferred from Turkey to Oman. If the President of the United States no longer surprises anyone with his erratic conduct, what can be said of the regime of the mullahs, which, cornered to the utmost, still continues to swagger?

Their nuclear program has been “eviscerated,” as Patrick Wintour writes in The Guardian, and thirty of their senior commanders have been eliminated in the wake of 160 massive strikes—yet the Iranians believe they can dictate to American envoys the parameters of the talks and the negotiating agenda? The brinkmanship they practice to perfection is a strategy of the abyss: pressing forward with dangerous actions to force the opponent to retreat and extract concessions. If they stick to it, it is because they are deeply convinced that Trump will never resort to military action.

This entrenched conviction may well lead them to ruin. It is all the more perilous to play double or nothing as U.S. naval vessels converge on the Strait of Hormuz, that strategic choke point for global oil transit. The mullahs, confident in their righteousness and seasoned in arduous negotiations, should fear above all a misreading—a grave miscalculation of the facts and the interests at stake. They risk falling victim to their own arrogance, so convinced are they that Trump is a bluffer who quickly backs down.

An Uncertain Outcome

The occupant of the White House would do well to disabuse his adversaries, for he appears to be growing impatient. According to Israeli leadership circles, as reported by Haaretz, the Islamic Republic is bound to sabotage the negotiations, having entered them merely to buy time and grant a reprieve to its nuclear program. Yet dismantling that program—or “diluting” highly enriched uranium—would, for the ayatollahs, amount to shooting themselves in the foot.

In short, the rounds of talks underway in Oman may drag on indefinitely, or be suspended only to resume later. The affair promises to be long and will likely fizzle out—or at best end in a maritime blockade. Unless, of course, there is an Israeli coup de Jarnac!

Væ victis

But the great forgotten and the great vanquished of the Omani conclaves will remain the dissidents, whose fate is nowhere on the agenda. Thirty thousand victims have been mentioned. May they rest in peace. But what fate awaits the 50,000 detainees languishing in prison? For Gholamhossein Mohseni Ejei, head of the judiciary, those involved in the protests should expect “no leniency.”