Iranian analysts clash over escalation and diplomacy in debate
Foad Izadi called for increasing pressure on the United States, while Mohsen Baharvand warned that escalation could expose Iran to greater harm.
In an IRNA-reported debate, Foad Izadi advocated raising the costs of U.S. policy, including possible restrictions on oil transit, while former diplomat Mohsen Baharvand warned that escalation could trigger a stronger response and urged keeping diplomacy open.
TEHRAN — Iranian academic Foad Izadi and former diplomat Mohsen Baharvand offered sharply different strategies for dealing with tensions involving the United States in a debate reported by IRNA.
Izadi argued that Iran should seek to raise the costs of U.S. policy, including by restricting oil shipments through the Strait of Hormuz and potentially targeting U.S. infrastructure in the region if Washington’s policy does not change. He said diplomacy alone had failed to alter U.S. behavior.
Baharvand rejected the assumption that increasing tensions would force the other side to back down. He warned that the United States could respond with even greater escalation, benefiting from superior military and economic capabilities, and urged Iran to preserve diplomatic channels while maintaining its defensive readiness.
Both speakers said Iran should seek to influence U.S. policy, but they disagreed over whether pressure or continued diplomatic engagement would be the more effective tool.