Iran says no foreign link to port blast, cites safety failures

The US Treasury Department on Tuesday designated six entities and six individuals based in Iran and China for their role in a network procuring ballistic missile propellant ingredients - sodium perchlorate and dioctyl sebacate - on behalf of Iran’s IRGC from China to Iran.

Sodium perchlorate is what the New York Times said was the likely cause of the deadly explosion in Bandar Abbas on Saturday, citing a source close to the Revolutionary Guard.

“Iran’s aggressive development of missiles and other weapons capabilities imperils the safety of the US and our partners,” said Secretary of the Treasury Scott Bessent. 

“It also destabilizes the Middle East, and violates the global agreements intended to prevent the proliferation of these technologies. To achieve peace through strength, Treasury will continue to take all available measures to deprive Iran’s access to resources necessary to advance its missile program.”

Initial findings show no foreign involvement in the Rajaei port explosion, said Iran’s parliamentary national security spokesman.

“Based on reports so far, the blast had no external origin,” Ebrahim Rezaei said after a committee briefing on Tuesday.

He added that investigators found evidence of “negligence and failure to observe safety protocols” at the site, which requires further expert review.

Ahmad Ajam and Sara Fallahi, lawmakers sent by the National Security and Foreign Policy Committee, submitted their preliminary report to parliament on Tuesday after visiting the port.

After a stunning political comeback landed Trump back in the White House for a second term, the outcome of a typically Trumpian, bumpy dash for a deal is not yet known after 100 days.

Trump’s new term began with a reinstatement of his so-called “maximum pressure” campaign, this time aggressively targeting Iran’s energy and oil sectors, including Chinese importers and independent refineries processing Iranian crude.

Since Trump took office, the Iranian currency initially plummeted by 80,000 rials to the dollar. However, it has recently clawed back some value due to growing optimism around nuclear negotiations between Washington and Tehran.

This diplomatic track is being pursued alongside potential military contingency plans, with Trump repeatedly warning that if a deal is not reached, "there will be bombing."

"It will be bombing the likes of which they have never seen before," the president said during an NBC news interview in March.

Signs of military posturing are evident: strategic bombers positioned near Iran in Diego Garcia, a surge of US aircraft in Doha, and intensified strikes against the Iran-backed Houthis in Yemen—all serving as a backdrop to the ongoing negotiations.

'Rushed, inconsistent'

Trump’s Iran policy so far appears muscular but inconsistent, said retired Major General Andrew Fox in an interview with Iran International.

“Trump is showing military flex but he’s not using all the leverage America has,” Fox argued. “In terms of timing, the Iranian economy was already struggling. That could have been leveraged further. We saw the rial jump 20% as soon as the talks were announced—so potentially a negotiating lever was given away too easily."

Fox described Trump's approach so far as "mixed, rushed, and inconsistent."

“We know Trump values a deal above all else. He’s super anti-war. He doesn't like using the military lever of governance,” said Fox, now a research fellow at the Henry Jackson Society.

One reason for the haste may be Trump’s self-imposed 60-day deadline for reaching a nuclear agreement with Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khamenei. Trump issued this timeline in a letter delivered shortly after taking office, news outlet Axios reported.

Speed versus Substance

Holly Dagres, creator of the newsletter The Iranist and a senior fellow at The Washington Institute, warned that Trump's fast-track approach risks overlooking critical issues like human rights.

“This hurry might meet the 60-day deadline Trump wants,” Dagres said. “But it risks rushing past key issues that deserve deeper negotiation.”

Dagres suggested human rights benchmarks could be tied to sanctions relief—crediting Nobel laureate Narges Mohammadi and other activists inside Iran for pushing to include human rights in the nuclear discussions.

Mixed Messaging from Trump's Team

Adding to the confusion, US Special Envoy to the Middle East Steve Witkoff recently issued conflicting public statements on the goal of the negotiations.

On April 14, Witkoff told Fox News the US might accept Iran maintaining uranium enrichment at those permitted by a 2015 nuclear deal (3.67%) under stringent verification.

Yet a day later he insisted on social media that a "Trump deal" must require Iran to "stop and eliminate" its enrichment program entirely.

The apparent contradiction could be strategic, according to Behnam Ben Taleblu, senior fellow at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies (FDD).

“The president actually likes to cultivate uncertainty,” Taleblu said, arguing it is too early to fully grade Trump’s Iran policy—or even predict where it is headed.

Ironically, Taleblu added, Trump’s biggest success so far has gone largely unrecognized.

“The most successful element of the Iran policy has not been celebrated even by die-hard politicos who believe in the president, and that is getting the Islamic Republic of Iran under Ali Khamenei to engage, be it directly or indirectly, with the Trump administration."

Early Days, Uncertain Outcomes

For Iranian-American policy director Cameron Khansarinia of the National Union for Democracy in Iran (NUFDI), it’s simply too soon to judge.

Trump’s unpredictable style, Khansarinia said, makes it difficult to forecast his next move. But he praised Trump’s first-term Iran policy as the most effective against Iran's theocratic rulers —and sees similar themes emerging now.

“I think he does have a strategy. It just hasn't had time yet to bear fruit," Khansarinia said. "For a successful Iran strategy, all he has to do is go back to his first term and implement those policies.”

President Trump’s unpredictable style arguably may have forced Tehran into negotiations—an achievement or a mishap depending on where one sits on the political spectrum.

His current Iran policy reflects a strategic shift from his first term, combining diplomatic overtures with overt threats of attack, the wisdom of which remains unclear.

Baghdad fully supports the ongoing negotiations between Washington and Tehran, said Iraqi Foreign Minister Fuad Hussein, cautioning that a breakdown in diplomacy could trigger “catastrophic consequences” across the region.

“The fear is that the two sides will not reach any deal,” Hussein said in an interview with Asharq Al-Awsat's Washington bureau chief Hiba Nasr.

He added that any agreement between the US and Iran “will not be at the expense of other regional parties,” and urged the continuation of talks.

The next round of Oman-mediated negotiations is expected to be held in Rome on Saturday.

Some commentators and former officials say the government of Masoud Pezeshkian is unable to resolve even the simplest domestic political issues that could improve the lives of ordinary Iranians.

One example, noted by centrist politician and former presidential candidate Mostafa Hashemi-Taba, is the failure to adopt daylight saving time to help with Iran's energy crisis.

Iran's parliament recently discussed the importance of the measure, but lawmakers refused to prioritize the bill, with Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf joking that the matter would be taken up at a later date.

In an interview with the news website Rouydad24, Hashemi-Taba attributed such failures to a "lack of rationality" in governance.

"The government has no principles when it comes to addressing problems," he said, accusing officials of resorting to empty slogans instead of practical solutions, and engaging in futile debates until a new crisis diverts attention from unresolved issues.

"There is no public participation in Iran. Only a select group of people make decisions," Hashemi-Taba said.

Another stalled initiative is changing the weekend from Thursday–Friday to Saturday–Sunday to facilitate international commerce.

Despite months of debate in parliament and other government offices, the measure—deemed necessary by some economists—has been dismissed by some lawmakers with bizarre arguments.

Any weekend change, some critics have asserted, could hinder population growth, since Iranians traditionally conceive children on Thursday nights, and a Saturday–Sunday weekend would disrupt this pattern, as people would have to work on Fridays.

Meanwhile, more pressing issues, such as water and energy shortages, remain unresolved.

Tehran's freshwater resources stand at just 14% of their usual levels, according to official statistics, prompting the capital's governor to declare a water shortage emergency last week.

The government has not managed to find a solution, instead proposing to divert water from other regions—an approach that could cause shortages elsewhere.

Civil unrest erupted in the historic city of Isfahan last week, as residents took matters into their own hands by blocking the flow of water from the Zayandeh Rood River to neighboring Yazd Province.

Electricity is in short supply too, causing regular power cuts in the capital and other regions. Officials have released a blackout schedule, but people say it lacks clarity, leaving them to discover outages only when they are plunged into darkness.

"Fake experts make all the wrong decisions and prevent a minority of true experts from solving problems," prominent sociologist Taqi Azad Armaki told the news website Fararu.

The problem, Armaki argued, is that the government cannot compile or prioritize the crises it faces, as those making crucial decisions lack expertise and are disconnected from what the people want.

"The majority of our society desires peace, jobs and engagement with the world, free from constant worry," Armaki said. "This group constitutes approximately 90 percent of the population. But there is a 5-percent minority that opposes such a lifestyle.

"Those elected to parliament with the support of this minority are louder and disproportionately influential," he added. "The country's resources have been distributed unfairly and unevenly between these two groups."