Following the rrecent developments in the region and continuation of challanges between Iran and the US in the Persian Gulf region and Strait of Hormuz, TABNAK reached out to Jeffrey David Sachs, an American economist and public policy analyst. He is a professor at Columbia University, at which he was formerly director of The Earth Institute and currently director of the Center for Sustainable Development. From 2002 to 2018, Sachs was special adviser to the UN Secretary-General.
Here is the full text of the interview:
Some news sources have expressed optimism about reaching a one-page agreement that would pave the way for negotiations on a comprehensive deal. What is your assessment?
The Trump administration would surely like to defeat Iran militarily, but it can’t do so because of Iran’s credible retaliatory power. If the US escalates, Iran can impose devastating costs on the [Persian] Gulf region, Israel, and the world economy (including the US economy). This is why the US is likely to stop fighting, with or without a formal agreement. The end of the conflict may be without a formal agreement, in which Trump simply declares “victory” and leaves.
There is growing optimism about a preliminary agreement, despite the fact that clashes have occurred in the Strait of Hormuz between Iran and the United States in recent days. Could these clashes jeopardize diplomacy?
Much can still go wrong, unfortunately. Israel obviously wants the fighting to resume, and Israel carries great lobbying weight in Washington. Trump also doesn’t want to appear to “lose” the war.Yet the US has no acceptable military options. This combination leads to the ambiguity and inconsistency of US policies, the lack of US willingness to sign a formal agreement, lack of US commitment to any negotiated outcomes, and the continued possibility of false flags, miscalculations, and irrational decisions.
Given recent developments, Iran seeks to maintain control over the Strait of Hormuz as a strategic asset. What is your assessment of this matter?
I don’t think Iran’s control of the Strait should worry the world. Iran would prefer an open and functioning Strait of Hormuz, so long as Iran’s security is not threatened. Iran may collect a toll, but collecting a toll is a sensible option given the costly destruction that Iran has incurred because of the US and Israeli aggression. More generally, Iran would like good relations with the other [Persian] Gulf countries, if they stop hosting US military bases and attacks against Iran.
Considering the current developments, which scenario do you find most likely: continuation of the status quo, containment of conflict and further war, or an agreement?
I tend to believe that there will be an uneasy cessation of hostilities without any formal agreement. Of course, this is just guesswork on my part, since the uncertainties are high.
It is said that regarding Iran's nuclear program, there is a possibility of suspending enrichment, and after a period that is not yet specified, Iran would be allowed to enrich below 3.67 percent. Regarding enriched stockpiles, they might be stored in countries such as China or Russia. If these points are true, how much could they help resolve these issues?
I don’t believe that the nuclear issues can be settled bilaterally at this stage, and perhaps a real settlement will have to await several months or even a year or more after the end of fighting. The US is, sadly, not a trustworthy counterpart at this point. It ripped up the JCPOA in 2018, used maximal economic warfare for decades, and twice brazenly attacked Iran during negotiations, in 2025 and again in 2026. I believe that Iran is right to declare that an end to the fighting should come first before the nuclear issues are addressed. Later, when Iran’s national security is better assured, the nuclear issues can be revisited, but in a multilateral context where Russia, China, and the US all participate, and ultimately where the UN Security Council enforces the agreement – this time not allowing the US to renege on the agreement.
