The nuclear confrontation with Iran is again moving in two opposite directions. On 9 September, the International Atomic Energy Agency’s Board of Governors referred Iran to the UN Security Council over alleged breaches of its non-proliferation obligations, the first such referral in two decades. A day later, Donald Trump warned Tehran against renewed activity near the Pickaxe Mountain complex close to Natanz.

Yet diplomacy has not disappeared. Oman is preparing talks involving Iran and Gulf states over the future of the Strait of Hormuz, while Iran and the UAE have joined other BRICS members in calling for restraint and a political resolution to the wider regional conflict. The coexistence of escalating nuclear pressure and continuing diplomatic activity points to the central strategic question: what is all the pressure supposed to achieve?

The United States has already accumulated substantial military and economic leverage over Iran. But leverage has strategic value only when it is converted into a political result.

The United States has already accumulated substantial military and economic leverage over Iran. But leverage has strategic value only when it is converted into a political result.

Washington can continue using military strikes, sanctions and economic coercion as an open-ended policy, or it can use those instruments to pursue a verifiable agreement that prevents Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon while reducing the costs and risks of a prolonged regional conflict.

This is not a choice between strength and weakness. It is a choice between demonstrating power and turning power into an outcome that can endure after military operations stop.

From pressure to leverage

The Trump administration’s stated objective remains clear. Its National Security Presidential Memorandum on Iran restored the policy of “maximum pressure” and declared that Tehran must be denied every path to a nuclear weapon.

The more difficult question is how that objective can be secured over time.

Military force can destroy facilities and delay a nuclear programme. It cannot erase technical knowledge, remove the political motivations that drive nuclear policy or determine the choices of future Iranian governments.

Military force can destroy facilities and delay a nuclear programme. It cannot erase technical knowledge,........

© Middle East Monitor