John Kirby warned that expectations for a peace agreement between the U.S. and Iran should remain modest [1].
The tension between cautious diplomatic forecasting and aggressive presidential rhetoric highlights the volatile nature of current negotiations. A failure to reach a deal could lead to a significant escalation of hostilities in the region.
Kirby, the former White House National Security Communications Advisor, said during an appearance with Chris Jansing and Richard Haass, the president emeritus of the Council on Foreign Relations [1]. During the discussion, Kirby said, "Set our expectations low" [1].
This call for realism contrasts with the approach of President Donald Trump. The president indicated that the U.S. might take more drastic action if diplomacy fails to produce a result in the immediate future.
Trump said, "We may finish the job in Iran if a peace agreement isn’t settled soon" [1].
Kirby's remarks suggest that the path to a formal agreement is fraught with difficulty. The push for a quick settlement appears to be a strategy used by the administration to pressure Iranian officials into concessions, a tactic that risks bypassing the gradual trust-building typically required for long-term peace.
While Kirby emphasizes a grounded perspective on the likelihood of a deal, the presidential threat of "finishing the job" introduces a timeline of urgency. This duality creates a complex diplomatic environment where the U.S. is simultaneously signaling a lack of confidence in a quick resolution and a willingness to use force if one is not reached.
“"Set our expectations low."”
The disconnect between Kirby's diplomatic caution and Trump's ultimatum reflects a 'good cop, bad cop' strategy or a fundamental split in how the U.S. views its leverage. By lowering expectations publicly while threatening escalation, the U.S. seeks to maintain strategic ambiguity, keeping Iran uncertain about whether the U.S. is truly committed to a deal or preparing for military action.
