The Trump administration’s approach to Iran has been described by British intelligence analysts as a series of erratic reversals that undermine long-term strategic coherence. In the past year, the United States has alternated between maximum pressure sanctions and offers of direct negotiation, a pattern that analysts say has confused allies and emboldened hardliners in Tehran.
According to a joint assessment circulated among Whitehall departments, President Donald Trump’s personal inclination to “deal” contradicts the hawkish posture of his national security team. The analysts note that while the administration publicly insists on a policy of economic strangulation, private overtures have been made through Swiss intermediaries. This mixed messaging has allowed the Iranian regime to play for time, exploiting the gap between rhetoric and action.
The report draws on intercepted communications and diplomatic signals from the past six months. It highlights that in February, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo delivered a speech vowing to cut off all Iranian oil exports. By April, the White House was reportedly exploring a 90-day waiver for major importers. “The outcome is a policy that is neither containment nor engagement,” said one senior British intelligence source. “It is improvisation dressed as strategy.”
European allies have grown frustrated with the lack of consistency. The French and German governments have both indicated that they cannot plan their own diplomatic initiatives around a Washington that might shift its stance without warning. The British assessment warns that this unpredictability might encourage Iran to accelerate its nuclear breakout capacity, as it calculates that the United States will not follow through on military threats.
The intelligence community’s view is that Tehran perceives Trump as a transactional leader who can be waited out. The Iranian leadership has studied his record of withdrawing from the 2015 nuclear deal and then demanding a better one, only to impose new sanctions when talks stalled. They have concluded that personal diplomacy without institutional backing is unlikely to produce lasting change.
A separate annex to the report examines the role of key advisors. National Security Advisor John Bolton is seen as a consistent force for confrontation, while the President’s own impulses lean toward negotiation. The analysts note that Bolton’s tenure has been marked by public disagreements with Trump over North Korea and Afghanistan, and that his influence on Iran policy may be waning.
The White House has not formally responded to the intelligence assessment. However, a State Department official, speaking on condition of anonymity, dismissed the analysis as “old thinking” from bureaucrats who failed to understand the President’s strategic vision. The official said that the administration’s policy is calibrated to maximise leverage while keeping all options open.
British intelligence recommends that the UK government press for clearer signals from Washington at the next G7 summit. Without a unified approach, the analysts argue, the risk of miscalculation leading to conflict remains dangerously high. The assessment concludes that Trump’s flip-flop strategy is not a deliberate tactic but a reflection of deep divisions within his administration.
This report is based on a confidential document shared with allied partners and seen by this correspondent. The analysis reflects the views of British intelligence professionals, not official government policy.
