MICHEL MARTIN, HOST:
One top official in Iran says the U.S. cannot influence the regime through military might or ultimatums. Over the weekend, the speaker of Iran's Parliament told state media that Iran stands firmer today than it did before the ceasefire. We're going to ask Vali Nasr to help us understand this moment. He has advised American policymakers and diplomats on Iran. And he is a professor at the Johns Hopkins University School of Advanced International Studies. Good morning, professor. Thanks for joining us once again.
VALI NASR: Good morning. Good to be with you.
MARTIN: So Iranian state media says Tehran has rejected a second round of talks, blaming - and I'm going to quote here - "Washington's excessive demands, unrealistic expectations, constant shifts in stance, repeated contradictions and the ongoing naval blockade, which it considers a breach of the ceasefire." Unquote. Do you see - do you think that's true? Or do you think that there are other reasons for Iran not to participate?
NASR: No, I think they are largely true. In other words, when the first round of talks ended, there was a process that started of deescalation, that the U.S. imposed a ceasefire on Lebanon, which was Iran's demand. Iran reciprocated by saying that it was going to open the Strait of Hormuz. But then President Trump made a U-turn.
He kept the blockade and said that it would be enforced and then sent out a series of tweets in which he claimed that Iran had agreed to giving up its nuclear program without actually those agreements having been made. And that led Iran to think that President Trump was not honest about or not sincere about the negotiations and, like the previous two times when they were negotiating, that he might attack Iran. And also internally, the government in Iran found itself at odds with its own population, who had sacrificed through the war and now thought that Iran had thrown in the towel without even getting a final agreement.
MARTIN: I was going to ask you about that. I was wondering if Iran's stance here is directed at - it's obviously directed at the Trump administration. But I'm wondering, is it also directed toward the Iranian people in some?
NASR: I think it is because I think there's a deep distrust in what the U.S. is playing at, given President Trump's record in the negotiations with Iran. And I think it's true that Iran's leadership is now deeply suspicious about whether the president is preparing for war while he wants to go to Islamabad. But also, the regime has to keep face with its own population. It does not want to be either bullied by President Trump or that it has somehow surrendered, which then would be damning for them domestically.
MARTIN: I want to talk again about some of the attacks from over the weekend that we've been reporting on. U.S. Central Command says the U.S. fired on and took custody of an Iranian ship, saying it refused to comply with warnings. The British military said two Iranian Revolutionary Guard gunboats fired on a tanker going through the Strait of Hormuz. And India reported a serious incident of firing on merchant ships.
And I'm just wondering how you see this kind of back-and-forth. Is it - I'm just wondering, I mean, from the U.S. side, obviously, the Trump administration seems to feel that this kind of creates a sense of leverage, like an ongoing demonstration of military might. And then the Iranians are responding. What effect do you think this is having on the negotiations?
NASR: I think the door of negotiations is still open for both sides. But I think there is now less trust than there was when they left Islamabad. And both sides are gradually escalating to put pressure on the other side. But I also - Iran is now getting ready for the fact that there won't be a diplomatic solution and that they may have to return to war. And therefore, they are trying to send a signal to the U.S. that this is going to be costly, and it's going to - and Iran will retaliate against U.S. actions as well.
MARTIN: And, of course, you heard that President Trump renewed his threat against Iran's power plants and bridges. You know, but then last time he said he would attack civilian infrastructure, a few hours before that deadline, he announced the current ceasefire. I'm just sort of wondering how that is playing out.
NASR: Well, I think, you know, the problem is that he veers from one pole to the other. In other words, he pursues diplomacy and then returns to undermining it and threatening war. And given the fact that he attacked Iran twice before in the middle of negotiations, the Iranians are hoping for the best but preparing for the worst here, which is a return to war.
MARTIN: Before we let you go, with the ceasefire expiring Wednesday, do you see any indication that talks could resume?
NASR: I think they could. But it requires a last-minute high-wire act by the mediators.
MARTIN: That's Vali Nasr. He studies Iranian politics at the School of Advanced International Studies at Johns Hopkins University. Professor Nasr, thanks so much for sharing these insights with us once again.
NASR: Thank you. Transcript provided by NPR, Copyright NPR.
NPR transcripts are created on a rush deadline by an NPR contractor. This text may not be in its final form and may be updated or revised in the future. Accuracy and availability may vary. The authoritative record of NPR鈥檚 programming is the audio record.
