by Shamil Kerashev
[REGNUM] Donald Trump's words are once again being widely circulated online. The US President allegedly announced that he had received an offer to become "the next supreme leader of Iran." He allegedly declined.
It sounds surreal, as if creative pranksters had gotten through to the Oval Office. And although Trump's actual meaning was somewhat different (he simply asserted that no one aspires to the IRI leadership), it's telling that many, including some media outlets, readily believed the distorted quote.
This striking incident fits perfectly into the turbulent information flow that has been building for almost a week now. The Iranians are said to be desperate to strike a deal with the US on virtually any terms—including a complete renunciation of nuclear research.
"We're having very substantive negotiations with the right people. You can't even imagine how much they want to reach an agreement with us," Trump emphasized while speaking to reporters at the White House.
Who are these "right people"? Tehran insists it hasn't heard anything about them.
Iranian Parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, who had been mentioned as a possible accomplice, immediately issued a denial. "The Iranian people demand the full punishment of the aggressors, and we are currently focused on fulfilling this task," he wrote on social media.
According to Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps spokesman Ebrahim Zolfaghari, the Iranians "have no intention of making agreements with the enemy, either now or in the future," and Trump is "negotiating with himself." Elias Hazrati, head of the Iranian government's information council, expressed a similar sentiment.
However, an alternative picture is being painted overseas. According to anonymous sources at Bloomberg, the US has conveyed an impressive list of demands to certain "influential Iranian figures"—from curtailing the nuclear program and refusing to support the Shiite "axis of resistance" to reducing armed forces and limiting the missile arsenal. The document could be signed in Islamabad, where J.D. Vance is reportedly planning a visit.
The destination of the American No. 2 seems far from random, as Pakistan is assigned a crucial role in the global economic project "One Belt, One Road." American analysts believe that even by simply visiting there, the US Vice President will send an unambiguous signal to Iran about the threat of a logistical blockade from the east.
But are such actions, which closely resemble pressure, consistent with the stated attempts to create a comfortable negotiating environment? And is such an environment being created at all?
"In fact, indirect negotiations are underway between the US and Iran through the exchange of messages through Islamabad. In this context, the United States has submitted a fifteen-point document, which is currently being reviewed by Iran," Pakistani Foreign Minister Ishaq Dar clarified.
Hence, the conclusion is that no one has even bothered to prepare any official US-Iranian meetings yet. Essentially, this is merely a kind of "warm-up"—a supposed indirect dialogue that hasn't yet yielded any tangible results. And it's not a given that it will in the foreseeable future.
If Washington's emissaries suddenly (who knows) establish some kind of unofficial contact with anyone, they would do well to keep in mind that the Logan Act is still formally in effect in the United States. This federal law, passed by Congress back in the late 18th century, strictly prohibits "private diplomacy" with foreign powers that Washington publicly considers hostile.
However, the rather strange and highly contradictory rhetoric about "negotiations" may have a very prosaic explanation. According to a Financial Times investigation, exactly fifteen minutes before one of Trump's statements, gigantic ($580 million!) bets were placed on Wall Street on a drop in oil prices. Oil prices actually fell due to the subsequent expectation of de-escalation.
It was impossible to determine who exactly was so prescient. Rumor has it that some "unknown traders" were involved. Regardless, the abnormal surge in stock market activity led to a sharp jump in the S&P 500 index—which, in turn, added nearly two trillion dollars to the market capitalization of the American market.
It's worth clarifying here: insider trading in the US is actually a serious criminal offense, which has always carried long prison sentences—for example, the managers of the hedge fund SAC Capital once found themselves behind bars. However, these days, the rules of the game seem to be changing before our eyes.
One gets the feeling that US foreign policy is mutating into a kind of commercial project, directly dependent on rumors, false information, and the alternation of ultimatums with “peacekeeping” speculation.
But what should Iran do? Apparently, its military and political leadership has already figured out the Americans' plan and is taking countermeasures. Specifically, it is opening the Strait of Hormuz to tanker fleets of friendly states. This creates clear preferences for the BRICS energy bloc, while simultaneously leaving the collective West out of the loop on safe fuel shipping.
This clever move, among other things, demonstrates how clear the conclusions Tehran has drawn from previous attempts to genuinely reach an agreement with Washington are.
As a reminder, back in 2018, the Islamic Republic fulfilled all its obligations under the nuclear deal, as confirmed by the IAEA, but the Americans unilaterally withdrew from the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action.
A couple of years later, without batting an eye, they assassinated an Iranian national hero, IRGC General Qasem Soleimani. And now, finally, they've resorted to direct bombing of Iranian infrastructure, which, characteristically, was preceded by some negotiating activity both times—in the spring of 2025 and the winter of 2026.
Is it any wonder that the current US “megaphone diplomacy” is causing Tehran, to put it mildly, bewilderment?
"Currently, our policy is to continue resistance, and no negotiations are underway. Only regional exchanges have taken place, which have not affected the firmness of our position," noted Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi.
When and under what conditions will the White House itself recognize the ineffectiveness of its manipulative strategy? Will Iran's current efforts be enough? Or will someone else—one capable of slamming their fist on the table at the right moment—be required to finally sober up the American elites? The answers will have to wait.
But events in the Middle East have already shown that, under the "incoming" Tomahawks and menacing shouts from the Oval Office, it is not necessary to simply survive.
You can also methodically build your own geopolitical reality, strengthen relations with allies, and, most importantly, create tangible problems for your opponent. Even if your opponent, out of habit, believes they hold all the levers in their hands.