Trump ‘Likely Smirked’ as Iran’s President Lashed Out at US

Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian’s forceful criticism of Washington at the United Nations likely elicited little more than a knowing smile from President Donald Trump, who believes he has the upper hand, according to a foreign policy analyst who spoke to News Media on Wednesday.

The comments followed dueling speeches at the U.N. General Assembly in New York, where Pezeshkian and Trump took the same stage less than a day apart. Their addresses underscored the deepening hostility between the United States and Iran.

“Trump understands he holds the cards, and he may not even have paid much attention to what the Iranian president was saying,” Behnam Ben Taleblu, a senior fellow at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, told News Media.

In his remarks, Pezeshkian accused the United States and Israel of launching attacks against Iran and presented Tehran as the target of unprovoked aggression.

“We have only defended ourselves. We are not terrorists,” Pezeshkian said.

“Our innocent people have been the targets of cowardly attacks and aggressions imposed upon our country. America and Israel attacked us.”

Taleblu said the Iranian leader’s claims may have prompted a dismissive reaction from Trump, especially given the disparity he sees between Tehran’s public messaging and the Iranian government’s record. “I’m sure that would have drawn a smirk or a smile or a chuckle from the president’s face, seeing that crassness,” he said.

Pezeshkian spoke after Trump used the U.N. podium to defend the U.S. campaign against Iran and issue a stark warning: Tehran must either reach an agreement or risk even greater destruction.

“Or do I annihilate the Islamic Republic, and do it quickly, never giving them a chance to kill and destroy people and countries again?” Trump said Tuesday.

Although the two presidents exchanged sharp accusations, Taleblu said their overall approaches to the confrontation were not unexpected.

“To a certain degree, both President Trump and President Pezeshkian’s speeches before the U.N. General Assembly’s 81st session were predictable,” Taleblu said.

He added that the predictability reflected the current standing of both nations and the established pattern of their foreign policies toward one another.

Still, the public threats have not entirely closed the door on diplomacy. Behind the scenes, Washington and Tehran appear to be continuing to explore whether negotiations can produce a way forward.

YOU MIGHT ALSO LIKE: Fraudster Elizabeth Holmes Set for Transfer to New Facility

Trump said Tuesday that U.S. special envoy Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner held approximately three hours of discussions with Iranian representatives on the sidelines of the General Assembly. The president described the talks as productive.

Witkoff later explained that the exchanges took place indirectly, with mediators carrying messages between the American and Iranian delegations.

Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi also took part in the discussions, according to reports.

According to Taleblu, both governments are trying to “make time a weapon on their side” while shifting responsibility for the next major decision onto the other side—forcing its rival to choose between escalation and renewed engagement.

But Taleblu went on to characterize Pezeshkian’s broader message as an attempt to cast Iran as a victim through an anti-American, anti-Israel and anti-imperialist framework.

“It seemed to be more of a global South, anti-American, anti-Israeli, kind of anti-colonial, anti-imperialist message that he was looking to kind of paint the Islamic Republic as the victim,” Taleblu said.

“In reality, the long-serving victim in this entire crisis is the Iranian people because of the policies of the Islamic Republic.”

The competing messages — confrontation from the U.N. podium and diplomacy behind the scenes — highlighted the unresolved tensions between Washington and Tehran as officials explore whether negotiations can produce an off-ramp from the conflict.

“Despite the tough talk at the podium, both sides still feel like they need to signal an interest in talks, even though they’re both trying to use talks to shape an outcome that is more conducive to their interests,” Taleblu said.

Pezeshkian also told the General Assembly that Tehran would not surrender to military pressure while signaling that Iran remained open to diplomacy.

“I think the Iranians are trying to signal an interest in talks, but they may run into a brick wall quite soon if they foot-drag or delay or don’t meaningfully provide any kind of substantive change in their policy,” Taleblu said, citing Iran’s positions on the Persian Gulf, the Strait of Hormuz and its nuclear program.

“Ultimately, if the positions remain the same, the fact that they’re oscillating between shooting and talking doesn’t mean much because the red lines haven’t actually moved.

“Of course, the Trump administration is looking for a political win here.”