Tehran–Washington Negotiations Under the Shadow of U.S. Naval Threats? A Report on the Trump Administration’s Contradictory Rhetoric Toward Iran

Saturday, January 24, 2026

SAEDNEWS: The United States’ Recent Stances and Actions Toward Iran—from Donald Trump’s Contradictory Statements to Military Moves and Economic Pressure—Clearly Reflect the Continuation of a Deliberate Strategy Based on ‘Strategic Ambiguity.

Tehran–Washington Negotiations Under the Shadow of U.S. Naval Threats?
A Report on the Trump Administration’s Contradictory Rhetoric Toward Iran

According to SAEDNEWS qouting Shargh news, U.S. Strategy Toward Iran: Strategic Ambiguity in Action

  • Contradictory Signals from Washington:

    • Trump signals willingness to negotiate with Iran while simultaneously issuing explicit military threats.

    • Announces 25% tariffs on countries trading with Iran and deployment of a “massive” military force to the region.

  • Diplomatic Messaging vs. Reality:

    • Special envoy Steve Witkoff confirms no formal talks yet, but communication channels remain active.

    • Washington balances diplomacy with pressure, keeping Iran engaged but uncertain.

  • Economic and Military Pressure:

    • Treasury Secretary Scott Bennett emphasizes sanctions as a tool to influence Iran without military action.

    • U.S. aircraft carrier strike group, including USS Abraham Lincoln, moves toward the Middle East.

    • Additional air defense deployments under consideration to deter threats.

  • Regional Reactions:

    • Turkey opposes any U.S. military intervention, warns against encirclement, and urges serious talks with Tehran.

    • Regional actors are concerned about miscalculation and heightened tensions.

  • Strategic Ambiguity as Policy:

    • Trump uses ambiguity deliberately to:

      • Maintain maximum pressure on Tehran.

      • Deter regional actors.

      • Keep negotiation options open.

    • Military displays serve as “a stick over the negotiation table,” not a prelude to war.

  • Expert Analysis (Mohammad Ali Vakili):

    • Trump seeks the “lowest-cost scenario,” preferring negotiations over costly military conflict.

    • Iran’s complex, multi-layered situation explains simultaneous contradictory positions.

    • Ambiguity is a calculated strategy, not confusion.

  • Implications:

    • Short-term deterrence achieved, but long-term uncertainty and regional instability increase.

    • U.S. approach complicates Tehran’s decision-making while preventing a coordinated response.