Saed News: Based on experience, it must be said that whenever letter exchanges and message transmissions between Iran and the U.S. have been made public, they have resulted in nothing.
According to the political news service of Saed News, the Asr Iran website, expressing skepticism about Trump's claim regarding negotiations, wrote:
"Anwar Gargash, the envoy of the UAE government, traveled to Iran and met with our Foreign Minister. Previously, Iran's Foreign Ministry spokesperson had announced that the UAE envoy was carrying a letter from Trump. Now, Iran and the U.S. have a new mediator: the UAE. Previously, Switzerland, France, Iraq, Qatar, Japan, and Oman had acted as intermediaries between Iran and the U.S. Now, a new country has joined this lineup: the UAE.
When Araqchi mentioned that Trump's letter to Iran's Supreme Leader was being transferred by an Arab country, many speculated about possible candidates, even bringing up the names of Mohammed bin Salman and Saudi Arabia. However, no one expected the UAE to be involved. One reason for this was that Iran-UAE political relations have been strained and unstable, not strong or positive enough to build mediation upon.
This development surprised many. Mediation marks a turning point in Iran-UAE relations and could be a prelude to further improvement, as it has opened a new chapter in UAE-Iran relations. Iran has a unique relationship with the UAE: on one hand, the UAE is Iran’s second-largest trading partner after China; on the other hand, the two countries have the largest and most contentious territorial dispute. The UAE claims sovereignty over part of Iran’s land, accusing Iran of occupying three Persian Gulf islands and actively pursuing the matter in international forums. Iran, meanwhile, dismisses the claim and questions the very existence of a border dispute. Nevertheless, both sides have agreed that the issue of the three islands should not strain their political relations or hinder their trade growth.
Why shouldn’t this letter be viewed optimistically? In an unprecedented move, the transmission channel of the letter was publicly disclosed before it even reached Tehran. First, Al Mayadeen network reported the news, followed by Iran’s Foreign Ministry spokesperson confirming that the UAE envoy had traveled to Tehran as Trump’s letter carrier. In the history of mediations and letter exchanges between Iran and the U.S., this is the first time the Iranian side has publicly revealed the transmission channel. This may have been a reaction to Trump’s decision to publicly announce the letter’s dispatch.
The last time a U.S. president, Barack Obama, sent a written letter to Ayatollah Khamenei through the Sultan of Oman (Qaboos), it remained secret for a long time. Neither the sender (Obama), the recipient (Iran), nor the channel (Sultan Qaboos) made it public; everything remained confidential. However, this time, both the sender (Trump) announced it—even before sending the letter—and the recipient (Iran) disclosed the transmission channel (UAE) before receiving it, bringing the entire exchange into the public domain.
If Trump had wanted his letter to the Supreme Leader to succeed and yield results, he should not have publicized it but instead kept it confidential from start to finish—until a written or verbal response was received. This was the approach taken in Obama's correspondence, which ultimately led to direct Iran-U.S. negotiations and the JCPOA (nuclear deal).
Based on experience, it must be said that whenever letter exchanges and message transmissions between Iran and the U.S. have been made public, they have resulted in nothing. Iran’s decision to publicly disclose the transmission channel for Trump's letter should also be seen as a reason for a skeptical outlook on the outcome of this correspondence."
