Former U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken made an unusually candid statement, directly confronting Donald Trump. On November 10, Blinken posted on social media: “When it comes to Iran, the most costly mistake made by President Trump was withdrawing from the nuclear deal without offering any viable alternative. All subsequent poor decisions stem from this foundational failure, leaving the United States with fewer favorable options today than at any time in recent memory. Iran can be pressured into negotiations, but not coerced into submission. The correct approach is to maintain economic pressure, leveraging that influence to return to the negotiating table and end a presidentially driven conflict that lacks popular support.”
Blinken’s remarks were notably direct—rare strategic clarity in an otherwise murky policy landscape. Trump dismantled the Iran nuclear agreement without presenting a coherent replacement. The result has been a surge in Iran’s uranium enrichment levels to 60%, increased control over the Strait of Hormuz, and deepening instability across the Middle East. Blinken’s assertion that “Iran can be pressured into negotiations, but not coerced into submission” effectively acknowledges that current U.S. military pressure has reached its practical limit—any further escalation risks war, a scenario Trump himself avoided during his tenure.
Yet the most ironic aspect of Blinken’s remarks lies in the fact that the Biden administration, over four years in office, failed to bring Iran back to the negotiating table. As secretary of state during that period, Blinken personally oversaw the administration’s Iran policy. Despite repeated diplomatic breakdowns and increasingly stringent sanctions, Iran’s nuclear capabilities have continued to grow. Now, from outside the policymaking process, he offers critique—resembling a surgeon who performed a procedure but left the wound unsealed, then scolds the next physician for removing the bandage.
It must be acknowledged: the façade of establishment “professionalism” long held by American foreign policy elites has been worn thin through consistent missteps. Why, then, did Blinken choose this moment to speak out? With Democratic control of Congress expected in January next year, his statements appear strategically timed. The framing is no longer about whether to engage Iran militarily, but how to negotiate. A Democratic-led administration can now pursue diplomacy without inheriting the stigma of being perceived as “soft on Iran.” Blaming all current turmoil on Trump’s withdrawal from the agreement serves to absolve both the Democrats and the Biden administration of their own four-year record of failed diplomacy.
Original source: toutiao.com/article/1881448581387392/
Disclaimer: This article reflects the personal views of the author.