No one can.
No one can.
If one is trying to negotiate while maintaining a theocracy, then Trump won't listen, but ending the theocracy is one of the listed points, so it's logically consistent.
I mean, the Germans and Japanese and Iraqis probably couldn’t have trusted the U.S. either. They still surrendered because it was better than fighting a futile war.
Same here. Iran’s security chief (and, I’m assuming, de facto leader) messaging he’s ready to concede on those points certainly doesn’t put him in a worse position than he is now.
As for Iran, about all they could have done, in retrospect, was to actually develop nuclear weapons rather than just hemming and hawing and bluffing and stalling for 40+ years. It's amazing that the country that invented chess could blunder that badly.
There were so many mis-steps.
Iran could have rejected autarky. Constrained the IRGC’s corruption. Not funded proxies that pissed off every one of their neighbors (except for, maybe, Turkmenistan).
Not supported Hamas when they decided to deputize a lobotomy ward. Not drip fed Hezbollah’s rockets into Israeli air defenses. Not fired at Israel in a symbolic move in 2024. Not half assed their retaliation in 2025. Not assumed, with full faith, Trump was bluffing and thus not (a) seriously negotiate in Geneva nor (b) bother scattering their navy and air force in anticipation of strikes.
I’d actually argue an indigenous nuke was a strategic blunder for Iran. It cost them their economy and moral standing. Maybe pursuing Russia’s nuclear umbrella would have been a smarter move.