Can JD Vance negotiate an off-ramp from Donald Trump’s Iran war? That’s the question raised by an intriguing Guardian report suggesting that the regime in Tehran won’t sit down with Trump’s personal envoys, Jared Kushner and Steve Witkoff. Iran is instead open to having the US Vice President as an interlocutor, with the report citing sources in Pakistan, which has emerged as a key mediator.

If talks are indeed in the offing, and if Trump really gives Vance the necessary space to negotiate, this could be a golden chance for both the VP and America. But that’s a lot of ifs.

The military upside is obvious. The negotiated path would save the Trump administration from deploying various ground forces on their way to the region — supposedly to take Kharg Island, where the Islamic Republic processes most of its oil for the market. That battle will be hellish, to put it mildly, given that it offers the Iranians a static target of American troops in an area they’ve spent years fortifying.

Equally obvious is the political upside. Deploying ground troops risks taking an already unpopular war into politically catastrophic territory for the President and a Republican Party facing grim prospects at the ballot box in this year’s midterms and beyond. A Reuters poll last week found that just 7% of Americans support a ground deployment in Iran.

For Vance in particular, wrapping up the Iran war quickly is key to potentially saving his own presidential chances for 2028. As UnHerd reported earlier this month, the political situation is sufficiently dire that there is talk of deferring his bid until 2032. But Vance negotiating an honorable exit from an Iran war he reportedly opposed? That could change the dynamic for the better.

All those ifs remain daunting, however. For starters, the Iranian side continues to publicly telegraph total opposition to negotiations. Of course, Tehran defines “negotiations” narrowly to mean direct talks. Indirect messaging via mediators could be taking place, and this may set the stage for an exit from the war. Still, Iranian state TV gives no indication that the regime is in a jaw-jaw mood. Iranian leaders believe they’ve trapped Washington in an energy and economic vice grip, and that they can extract heavy concessions before loosening it — even if they have to take a few hits in the process.

The concessions they’re looking for, according to a Wall Street Journal report, include monetary compensation for the physical damage caused by the war, the permanent shutdown of US bases in the region, an end to Israel’s war against Hezbollah, and sanctions relief.

That may seem daunting but Vance could work with this list of asks, beginning with the Persian Gulf bases. There’s no clear sense that all of the Arab allies would even want the bases going forward; and even if some do, restoring them to operational status would take years. So that’s a question that can be fudged or deferred. As for ending Israel’s war on Hezbollah, that’s up to Jerusalem, not the United States — though a US exit from Iran may encourage Benjamin Netanyahu to retrench and pull away.

Direct compensation, meanwhile, is a non-starter for the United States, though much of the need would be met with sanctions relief that allows third-party states to invest in Iran’s reconstruction. US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent has already lifted some sanctions on Iranian oil, which could gift Tehran a $14 billion windfall. By formalizing and extending the current arrangement, both sides could spin that outcome as a success for their domestic audiences.

All this depends upon Trump — and Netanyahu — giving Vance a substantive space to negotiate. That might be the biggest if of all.

---

Sohrab Ahmari is the US editor of UnHerd and the author, most recently, of Tyranny, Inc: How Private Power Crushed American Liberty — and What To Do About It

SohrabAhmari

---