LSE Public Lectures and Events

Episode: US-Iran Relations under Trump 2.0: Prospects and Challenges
Date: October 15, 2025
Host: Peter Trubowitz (London School of Economics and Political Science)
Panelists:

• Dr. Sanam Vakil (Chatham House, Johns Hopkins SAIS)
• Dr. Dana Allin (International Institute for Strategic Studies, editor of Survival)
• Dr. Anahita Motazebrad (LSE, expert in Iranian foreign policy)

Overview

In this roundtable, three distinguished experts engage in a comprehensive analysis of the evolving dynamics between the US and Iran under President Trump’s second term. The discussion is framed by recent dramatic escalations: the Trump administration’s military engagement alongside Israel against Iranian nuclear facilities in June, the new ceasefire in Gaza, and shifts within the Middle East’s web of alliances. The episode investigates the prospects for renewed diplomacy, the legacy of past policies, regional calculations, and the roles of local and global actors as the region searches for resilience and stability.

Key Discussion Points and Insights

1. Context of US-Iran Relations and Strategic Shifts

[05:43] Dr. Sanam Vakil opens by framing US-Iran relations as deeply adversarial, with over four decades of minimal direct diplomacy, interrupted only by the JCPOA period (2015–2018). She emphasizes that:

• US policy has largely alternated between attempts at engagement (notably the JCPOA) and containment (sanctions, pressure).
• Sanctions have not altered Iranian behavior meaningfully:

  “I would argue that containment and sanctions have yet to really influence or change and alter the behavior of the Islamic Republic of Iran. So you would think after 46 years, you might try something else.” (Vakil, 12:40)

• Iran has compensated by developing regional deterrents (“Axis of Resistance” proxies) to protect regime security.

Regional Landscape Transformed

• Key Middle Eastern conflicts (Israeli-Palestinian, Iran and its proxies) are intertwined.
• The US withdrawal from the JCPOA triggered both Iranian escalation and a recalibration by Gulf states, who have sought their own rapprochements with Iran:
  • UAE and Saudi Arabia initiated dialogue and normalization with Iran, culminating in the 2023 Chinese-brokered Saudi-Iran deal.

Post-October 7th & June War

• The October 7th attacks and the subsequent two years saw Israel expand military action against Iran and its proxies.
• The 2024 “12-Day War” involving direct US and Israeli strikes on Iranian nuclear sites was bold but notably contained:
  • Both sides avoided massive escalation.
  • Iran’s regime demonstrated surprising resilience.
• The aftermath left the conflict unresolved, with both sides claiming victory but no permanent settlement achieved.

2. The Trump Administration’s “Running Room”

[21:08] Dr. Dana Allin analyzes Trump’s unique policy latitude:

• Trump is unencumbered by some of the restraint observed in prior US presidents and has “more running room” but “no idea where to run to.”
• Historically, assumptions in US foreign policy held that:
  • Only diplomacy, not military force, could resolve the Iran nuclear issue.
  • The JCPOA was a sub-optimal but workable compromise, “destroyed in what could only be called an act of willful vandalism by President Trump in his first term.” (Allin, 28:50)
• The June 2024 attacks defied prior nightmares of regional war, as Trump’s administration managed to:

  “Bring the United States into the war...and create his own reality...with a statement that after he did it, the nuclear program was totally obliterated...which was nonsense, but also an excuse to end the war after a few hours.” (Allin, 29:45)
  Trump’s political distinctiveness allows actions other leaders couldn’t take, for better or worse.

• The chance for a durable nuclear deal is seen as slim due to lack of diplomatic capacity, but Allin notes Trump could surprise both in diplomacy and hardline policy.

3. Iran’s Position: Strategic Calculus and Domestic Constraints

[32:55] Dr. Anahita Motazebrad offers the Iranian perspective:

• US-Iran relations oscillate between deep mistrust (“Hobbesian enmity”), rivalry, and rare moments of pragmatic cooperation (Afghanistan 2001, JCPOA).
• Iran’s foreign policy is increasingly pressured both externally (global order shifts, sanctions, regional exclusion) and internally (factional politics, economic distress).
• Trump’s renewal of “maximum pressure” has placed Iran in a bind:
  • “He is explicitly mentioned that he’s not going to change the regime, but just wants to bring Iran to the negotiation table and in his own words, to an unconditional surrender. And I think this word also is a bit controversial because the first or maybe last one it has been used…was in 1945, after World War II.” (Motazebrad, 37:35)
• Iranian elites are divided:
  • Hardliners resist negotiation, fearing loss of legitimacy or international intervention.
  • Some factions recognize the risks of isolation and seek cautious diplomatic openings, particularly in light of regional and global skepticism about US/Israeli intentions.

4. Shifting Regional Alliances and Room for Engagement

[49:17] Audience Q&A and panel response

• Dr. Vakil: Despite Iran’s proxy support, regional diplomatic normalization with Iran has expanded, not diminished:

  “By my count, there’s only one Arab state that hasn’t normalized ties with Iran...I don’t think Iran today, in 2025, is as isolated as it was a number of years ago. I think it is certainly much more integrated politically, diplomatically, and economically.” (Vakil, 63:23, 63:50)

• The Trump administration’s transactional approach—prioritizing commerce over military engagement—has resonated with Gulf states, though the June war and strikes on Qatar marked an inflection point putting new pressure on Israel and the US to revisit regional security strategy.

5. Nuclear Diplomacy: Future Prospects for a New JCPOA

[62:14] Audience question (Anthony V.): Will Trump, Israel, and US parties support a new nuclear deal?

• Dr. Vakil: A return to the JCPOA framework is unlikely; what’s needed is a non-aggression pact or regional security infrastructure, “where all regional actors agree to stop the proxy dynamics that are used by all states.”
• Dr. Allin: A new JCPOA is improbable, since Iran has “developed expertise and abilities that cannot be taken away,” and US domestic politics means “a deal Trump could reach, if he could reach a deal, might be not reversible in the way that a Democratic president’s deal was reversible.” (Allin, 67:28)
• Dr. Motazebrad: Support for integration and a shift to regional cooperation is feasible, but will depend on Iran’s willingness to adapt and the evolution of internal dynamics.

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• On US-Iran diplomacy’s limitations:

  “If you have not talked to a country for four decades, you don’t know that country, they don’t know you, and you are trying to analyze and understand each other through open source materials, through intelligence, through third parties effectively.”
  — Dr. Sanam Vakil (07:44)

• On Trump’s unique power:

  “There are simply things Trump can do that other presidents can’t do…these are mostly bad, but there can be pleasant surprises.”
  — Dr. Dana Allin (30:20)

• On Iran’s strategic dilemma:

  “Iran is down, but it is not out. But Iran’s foreign policy in this relation, it’s very important because…[it] always has been based on a combination of the pressures from the international system…and also the domestic pressure and the domestic and internal factional, you know, trends…”
  — Dr. Anahita Motazebrad (40:54)

• On the regional vision:

  “What we actually want to see in the Middle East is an integrated Middle East, not an Israeli-dominated Middle East or an Iranian-dominated Middle East, but actually a Middle East where conflicts are not just managed but politically settled, where there’s peace and prosperity, governance, and accountability.”
  — Dr. Sanam Vakil (64:24)

Timestamps for Key Segments

• 00:16 — Peter Trubowitz sets the stakes: state of US-Iran relations after recent direct military actions
• 05:43–20:28 — Dr. Sanam Vakil: US-Iran status quo, regional geopolitics, and implications of the “12-Day War”
• 21:08–32:23 — Dr. Dana Allin: US foreign policy evolution, Trump’s unpredictability, limits of diplomacy and war
• 32:55–45:11 — Dr. Anahita Motazebrad: Iranian strategic thinking, external and internal pressures, scenarios for future
• 49:17–54:26 — Panel responses on regional realignment, Trump’s transactional approach, and prospects for a new order
• 60:51–66:11 — Audience Q&A: Iran’s isolation, nature of Gaza conflict (genocide?), future of nuclear diplomacy
• 71:23–77:05 — Questions on recalibrating proxies, Iran’s succession risk, Iran-Israel historical/speculative relations
• 80:08–84:55 — Final reflections: cautious hopes for peace, resilience of civil society, regional agency

Closing Reflections: What Gives Hope?

• Anahita Motazebrad:

  “I wish that Iran goes towards peaceful times with its own people and also with the region and with the global, you know, powers as well, to bring prosperity for the Iranian people.” (80:08)

• Dana Allin:

  “You do see this unmistakably vibrant and in some ways resistant civil society in Iran…and in Israel.… Peace does sometimes come through exhaustion and through stalemate.” (80:38)

• Sanam Vakil:

  “The region has changed. This is not…snapping back to the status quo ante…Regional states are looking to exert agency and understanding that leaving conflicts to fester is very dangerous.” (83:07)

Summary Table

| Segment | Main Focus | Notable Quotes | | ------- | ---------- | -------------- | | Dr. Sanam Vakil | Historical context, status of US-Iran, lessons from recent conflict | “If you have not talked…for four decades, you don’t know that country...” | | Dr. Dana Allin | US policy missteps, Trump’s unpredictability & diplomatic prospects | “Some things Trump can do that others can’t...these are mostly bad, but...” | | Dr. Anahita Motazebrad | Iran’s foreign policy, ideological vs. pragmatic pressures | “Iran is down, but it is not out...” | | Q&A | Regional alliances, normalization, nuclear prospects, Gaza description | “What we…want to see…is an integrated Middle East…” |

Tone and Language

The panel’s tone is sober, nuanced, and pragmatic with candid asides and careful attribution of views. There is a strong emphasis on the complexity and unpredictability of current US and Iranian decision-making, and the limitations of both “maximum pressure” and ad hoc military engagement. The speakers stress the need for new frameworks—grounded in integration, agency, and realism—rather than the repetition of past mistakes.

Essential Takeaways

• US-Iran relations are not easily reset: Years of mistrust and lack of direct engagement create a dangerous knowledge gap.
• Trump’s style offers both risks and unusual flexibility: Unpredictable, sometimes reckless, but also capable of bold, unexpected moves.
• Regional actors are asserting agency: Arab states are engaging with both Iran and Israel, seeking their own interests apart from US directives.
• Prospects for new nuclear diplomacy exist but are slim: The political, technical, and trust deficits are formidable, with Iran’s advances in enrichment changing the risk calculus.
• Civil societies remain vibrant: Both Iran and Israel show signs of resilience, potentially laying groundwork for future change.
• Hope lies in exhausted adversaries and shifting regional priorities: The region's changing threat perceptions and new integration efforts may open as-yet unknown paths to stability.

Recommended for:
Anyone seeking a lucid, forward-looking exploration of US-Iran relations and the recalibration of power and alliances in the contemporary Middle East under Trump’s second term.