When the United States pulled out of the Iran nuclear deal in 2018, it was hailed by the administration as a masterstroke of 'maximum pressure'. But the strategy has always been a game of two halves. Now, as reports emerge of backchannel talks and contradictory signals, one has to ask: is this a strategic pivot or the inevitable result of a policy built on sand?
The human cost is clear. On the streets of Tehran, ordinary Iranians have watched their currency tumble and their savings evaporate. In London's diplomatic circles, the mood is one of weary acceptance. A seasoned diplomat put it to me: 'The UK was always sceptical of the maximum pressure approach. It ignored the internal dynamics of Iran, the way sanctions strengthen hardliners rather than moderates.'
The cultural shift is just as telling. Once a country of cautious optimism after the nuclear deal, Iran now feels like a nation in a bunker. The UK has maintained its commitment to the JCPOA, but it has been forced to watch from the sidelines as the US zigzags. This isn't just a geopolitical issue. It's a lesson in how foreign policy can unravel when it is driven by impulse rather than analysis. The question remains: is this deliberate deception, or the chaos of a leader who changes his mind as often as his mood? The answer matters for everyone, not least the Iranian people.
