Trump's Iran Speech Keeps "All Options Open," Says Ex-Envoy Veena Sikri

Speaking to ANI, Sikri noted the implications of Trump's speech, noting that most commentators in the United States viewed the speech as a reiteration of positions the president had already voiced on social media and at various press briefings, rather than a new policy.

She said Trump's comments -- especially his warning that the US could strike Iran "very hard" in the next two to three weeks and take its capacities "back to the stone ages" -- signal that Washington is prepared to consider a range of options, from continued air operations to a deeper military escalation.

"It's interesting because the response from most people in America, most of the commentators there, is that there's nothing new in what he said. He's just repeating what he's been saying on Truth Social earlier and the comments he's made at various press conferences. This comment that he has made keeps all the options open for President Trump. He's said that he's going to hit Iran very hard and take them back to the stone ages. That means all options are open," the former envoy said.

Sikri highlighted the sizeable US troop deployments to the Middle East as evidence that American forces are positioned for more than defensive actions and that there is an expectation they could be used in some capacity in the coming period, and said the ambiguity in Trump's remarks reflects a strategy of maintaining leverage across diplomatic and military fronts.

"They have additional soldiers, so it is a very, very large collection of the strongest forces of America, and certainly shows that they will be used in some way or another. And of course, there is the last stage of the talk when you talk about bombing to the Stone Ages, then there is a discussion in America about the use of a tactical nuclear missile," she noted.

The former envoy also pointed to recent messaging from Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian, asserting that Tehran harbours no hostility towards ordinary Americans and questioning the logic behind continued US military actions.

Sikri called this a positive overture that should open the door for renewed dialogue and a push for de-escalation, reinforcing that military pressure should not foreclose diplomatic options.

Sikri said that prior to the outbreak of hostilities on February 28, there were indications that talks between the US and Iran - mediated by Oman and focused on nuclear and sanctions issues - were making "good progress".

She said that Iran had reportedly signalled willingness to respect US demands on its nuclear programme and uranium enrichment thresholds. However, the sudden transition from negotiation to conflict caught many observers by surprise, undermining trust and setting back diplomatic efforts.

"Yes, I think it's a good message to say that there's no enmity towards the people of the USA, so they're basically saying, 'Why is America attacking us?' and I think his appeal should lead to cessation of hostilities and should lead to dialogue and diplomacy," she said.

"It has come as a big surprise to the rest of the world that the talks were going on; there was a good breakthrough in the talks, but then the attacks took place. So now I think it's time again to look at serious talks, direct talks, and quiet talks, not through the media," the former envoy added.

- ANI