Former White House deputy press secretary Hogan Gidley said keeping the option of U.S. military action against Iran available is important for negotiations.
This approach suggests that diplomatic leverage depends on the credible threat of force rather than purely political dialogue. By signaling a willingness to use military power, the U.S. aims to constrain Tehran's negotiating position.
Speaking during an interview on Sky News Australia, Gidley discussed the strategic utility of maintaining military options. He said that the approach helps put Iran in a position where its choices are limited.
"I do think though, Donald Trump leaving military action on the table is also important because if there is one thing we know is that Iran does not really understand the negotiation of anything," Gidley said [1].
Gidley said that the Iranian government responds more effectively to displays of power than to traditional diplomatic overtures. He said that a posture of strength is the only language the regime consistently acknowledges.
"What they do get is military might, strength, and power. They understand that," Gidley said [1].
By keeping military action as a viable alternative, Gidley said the U.S. signals that it will not be intimidated during discussions. This strategy is designed to ensure that Tehran views the cost of non-compliance as higher than the cost of reaching an agreement.
The former deputy press secretary said that the threat of force serves as a necessary backdrop to any diplomatic effort. He said that without such a deterrent, the U.S. loses the ability to effectively pressure the Iranian leadership.
“Iran does not really understand the negotiation of anything.”
This perspective reflects a 'peace through strength' doctrine, where military deterrence is viewed not as an alternative to diplomacy, but as the primary tool to make diplomacy effective. By framing the Iranian government as unresponsive to standard negotiations, the strategy prioritizes coercive leverage to force concessions.
