Pompeo Says Iran Deal is ‘Not Remotely Close’ as Midterm Elections Add New Pressure to Talks
Former Secretary of State Mike Pompeo is pouring cold water on expectations of a lasting U.S.-Iran agreement, arguing that Tehran’s demands suggest the two sides remain far apart and warning that Iran may see America’s approaching midterm elections as another weapon at the negotiating table.
Speaking on Fox News, Pompeo said Iran has political reasons to stretch out negotiations rather than quickly accept an agreement with President Donald Trump.
“They’re fully aware that there’s an election coming up, and they fully want to make President Trump lose that election,” Pompeo said. “They’ve had no president that’s taken down their military this way. No previous president, Republican or Democrat, has been prepared to do that.”
His assessment adds another dimension to an already complicated diplomatic confrontation. The dispute is no longer simply about what Washington and Tehran are willing to put into an agreement. It is increasingly about time and which side believes it can afford to wait longer.
Iran may see the American political calendar as leverage
Pompeo’s argument that Tehran could try to exploit the midterm election calendar is not emerging in isolation. Iran has presented sweeping conditions during negotiations surrounding the Strait of Hormuz, including demands involving sanctions relief, U.S. military activity, frozen Iranian assets and compensation for damage caused during the conflict.
Reporting by NPR has also highlighted expert assessments that Tehran may believe prolonging negotiations strengthens its position as Trump approaches the November midterms.
Asli Aydintasbas, a Brookings Institution fellow interviewed by NPR, described Iran’s approach as an attempt to demonstrate that it can endure pressure and drag out negotiations rather than surrender quickly.
That strategy introduces an unusual bargaining chip: the American election calendar itself.
A prolonged confrontation can create pressures far beyond the negotiating room. Oil prices, inflation, military spending and public frustration can turn an international dispute into a domestic political problem.
Oil prices were approaching $90 a barrel Tuesday as uncertainty surrounding U.S.-Iran negotiations and the reopening of the Strait of Hormuz continued to unsettle markets, according to Reuters.
That gives Tehran a possible incentive to calculate that Washington’s urgency will increase as Election Day approaches.
But waiting carries serious risks for Iran as well. Tehran continues to face economic pressure, infrastructure damage and the possibility that Washington could respond to stalled diplomacy with tougher measures rather than concessions.
NPR’s reporting similarly noted that Iran’s attempt to play a longer game could worsen economic and domestic pressures inside the country. In other words, both governments are effectively testing the other side’s pain threshold.
A temporary agreement is different from lasting peace
Another important distinction in Pompeo’s warning is the difference between reaching some kind of agreement and producing a long-term settlement.
Trump has repeatedly indicated that negotiations with Tehran could produce a breakthrough, and another round of U.S.-Iran discussions began in early August after the president delayed further military escalation.
Yet the issues under negotiation are enormous. The Strait of Hormuz remains central to the confrontation, and Tehran has attached extensive conditions to fully reopening the vital shipping route.
Meanwhile, Trump has introduced his own demand that Iran compensate the United States for American casualties and other damage attributed to Tehran and its proxies.
Those competing demands explain why a limited arrangement over shipping should not necessarily be confused with a comprehensive peace deal.
An agreement that allows commercial vessels to move more freely through Hormuz could reduce immediate economic pressure without resolving the deeper disputes separating Washington and Tehran.
Those disputes include Iran’s nuclear ambitions, sanctions, regional military activity, the future security architecture of the Persian Gulf and the conditions under which U.S. forces operate around Iran.
That is where Pompeo’s “not remotely close” assessment becomes particularly significant. The two governments might find enough common ground to produce a tactical arrangement designed to lower tensions. Building an agreement durable enough to prevent another confrontation is a much larger challenge.
Pompeo expects Washington to turn up the pressure
Pompeo said he believes the United States will ultimately have to “ratchet up the pressure” on Iran.
That would closely resemble the tougher approach he advocated as secretary of state during Trump’s first administration, when Washington pursued what it called a “maximum pressure” campaign against Tehran.
The current administration is already moving more heavily toward economic pressure. The Associated Press reported Tuesday that Trump is emphasizing renewed financial sanctions under an effort the administration calls “Operation Economic Fury” after military and diplomatic pressure failed to quickly produce Washington’s desired outcome.
That creates a potentially important shift in the confrontation. Military strength can damage Iran’s capabilities, but economic pressure operates on a different timetable.
Sanctions attempt to make continuing confrontation progressively more expensive, forcing Tehran to decide whether holding out is worth the financial damage.
Iran, however, appears to be making the opposite calculation: that time can hurt Washington too. That may ultimately be the real contest behind the negotiations.
Pompeo views Trump’s record of military action against Iran as a reason Tehran wants to politically weaken him. Iranian leaders may instead calculate that international energy disruption and domestic American frustration will eventually push Washington toward better terms.
Neither calculation guarantees success. And that is why the approaching midterms matter even though American voters will not be sitting at the negotiating table.
For Washington, an agreement could provide Trump with evidence that his combination of military force, sanctions and negotiation produced results. For Tehran, delaying that victory could itself carry strategic value if Iranian leaders believe political pressure will eventually make the United States more flexible.
The result is a diplomatic race in which the calendar matters almost as much as the negotiating documents.
Pompeo’s warning therefore goes beyond predicting that an Iran agreement remains difficult. He is arguing that Tehran may have little reason to make the final stretch easy.
With the midterms approaching, economic pressure mounting and major disagreements unresolved, the next phase of negotiations may ultimately answer a larger question: Which side believes it can afford to wait the other one out?
