Trump won't accept 'bad deal' with Iran: US Treasury Secretary
Washington, May 29
US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said that President Donald Trump would not accept a "bad deal" with Iran, insisting that any agreement must address Tehran's nuclear programme and guarantee open shipping lanes through the Strait of Hormuz.
Discussions with Iran were continuing, but Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent repeatedly declined to confirm reports of a tentative agreement, telling reporters at the White House that any deal would depend on President Donald Trump's approval.
"The teams have been going back and forth and President Trump has made it very clear," Bessent said. He added that Iran "has to turn over their highly enriched uranium", "cannot pursue a nuclear weapon" and that "the Strait of Hormuz has to free transit. Navigation of the seas has to be free and open as it was before".
"He's not going to take a bad deal. He's going to make a great deal for the American people," Bessent said.
Pressed several times on reports of a possible 60-day ceasefire extension and continued nuclear talks, Bessent declined to provide details.
"It's always a mistake to get out ahead of the President," he said. "Everything depends on what the President wants to do."
The Treasury Secretary argued that recent US military and economic pressure had succeeded in bringing Iran to the negotiating table.
"This administration, President Trump, has done something that no other administration is able to do. We have gotten the Iranians to talk about their nuclear programme and to perhaps commit to not having one. That has never happened before," he said.
Bessent also suggested that any future sanctions relief would be contingent on Tehran meeting key US demands.
"Nothing is going to be on the table until we see the Strait of Hormuz open and the Iranians agree that they have to turn over the highly enriched uranium and that they can't have a nuclear programme," he said.
The Treasury chief said energy markets remained resilient despite tensions in the Gulf and predicted oil prices could fall once shipping disruptions ease.
"There are almost 2000 ships waiting to come out of the Gulf and I think the oil market is going to be very well supplied on the other side of this, and that we could see prices come down very quickly," he said.
Bessent noted that oil prices were already lower than earlier expectations and credited increased US production.
"We are more resilient to energy price fluctuations due to President Trump's energy dominance and deregulatory agenda," he said, adding that the United States had become "the world's largest energy exporter".
Asked about reports of Iranian missile launches and alleged ceasefire violations, Bessent said Washington remained committed to pursuing a diplomatic resolution.
"President Trump always prefers a peace deal," he said. "Everything we have done thus far has been defensive."
At the same time, he warned that the administration's patience was not unlimited if negotiations failed to produce results.
The Strait of Hormuz remains one of the world's most critical energy chokepoints, handling a substantial share of global oil and liquefied natural gas shipments. Any disruption to traffic through the narrow waterway can have immediate consequences for global energy markets and supply chains.
— IANS
Reader Comments
It's good that the US wants a comprehensive deal covering both nuclear and shipping issues. India has always supported dialogue and non-proliferation. But I hope the negotiations respect Iran's sovereignty as well. A balanced approach is needed, not just American diktats.
As someone who follows global energy markets, I think Bessent's point about 2000 ships waiting to transit highlights the real economic cost. India imports about 80% of its oil, so any disruption in the Strait hurts us directly. A stable deal benefits everyone, including the US.
Trump says he wants a "great deal for American people" but what about the rest of us? 😅 India has friendly ties with both US and Iran. We should play a role in facilitating this dialogue. A bad deal is worse than no deal, but endless brinkmanship also hurts global stability.
Bessent's statement about Iran "turning over highly enriched uranium" seems reasonable for non-proliferation. But the history of broken promises on both sides makes me skeptical. India shares intelligence with the US on terror threats from the region, so we hope there's no miscalculation that escalates tensions.
I think the US is overplaying its hand. They've been squeezing Iran for years through sanctions, and now they want them to give up everything without any guarantees. Jaise kaha, "Nothing is going to be on the table until we see...". That's not negotiation, that's ultimatum. India should diversify energy sources. 🌏
We welcome thoughtful discussions from our readers. Please keep comments respectful and on-topic.