Iran demands structural reciprocity in US diplomacy amid decades of sanctions and covert interference
Original framing: “Iran has 'no trust' in US, will negotiate only if it is serious, Araqchi says - Reuters” — Reuters (via Google News)
The 1953 CIA-backed coup against Mossadegh—overthrowing Iran's democratically elected government for nationalizing oil—remains a foundational trauma shaping Iran's distrust of US intentions. The 1980s US support for Saddam Hussein during the Iran-Iraq War, including chemical weapons, reinforced Iran's view of the US as an unreliable adversary. The JCPOA's collapse under Trump, despite Iran's compliance, exemplifies how US commitments are perceived as conditional and reversible.
The Reuters headline reduces a complex geopolitical dynamic to a simplistic 'trust deficit,' ignoring how US actions—from the 1953 coup to JCPOA withdrawal—have systematically dismantled Iran's faith in diplomacy.
Iran's 'no trust' stance is not an irrational outburst but a calculated response to structural asymmetries: unilateral sanctions, covert regime-change operations, and a negotiation paradigm that demands Iranian concessions while offering none. The framing serves Western state and corporate interests by centering US credibility while obscuring the civilian toll of sanctions (e.g., 1980s Iraq war chemical attacks, today's medical shortages). Cross-culturally, Iran's demand for reciprocity aligns with Persian diplomatic traditions (*taarof*) and African non-intervention principles, yet these parallels are erased in favor of a myopic US-centric narrative. A systemic solution requires binding reciprocity agreements, track II diplomacy, regional security pacts, and a truth commission—mechanisms that address historical trauma while dismantling the zero-sum logic that perpetuates conflict.