On Thursday, the United States announced new sanctions targeting major automakers in Iran, in addition to prominent companies in the fields of railways, manufacturing and metals, as part of its effort to intensify pressure on Tehran in its war with it.
A US Treasury Department statement said: “Given that the railway and automobile sectors represent some of the largest remaining sources of revenue for the regime and its logistical capabilities, today’s action directly strikes the vital arteries that Iran relies on to maintain its economy and circumvent sanctions.”
The new sanctions target the two largest car manufacturing companies in Iran, Iran Khodro (IKCO) and SAIPA, which supply their products to the local market and also export to regional trading partners.
The new sanctions included a total of seven automobile manufacturing companies, and are part of its efforts to deprive the Iranian government of revenue sources. The sanctions also affected “Nero Motor,” which is the largest motorcycle manufacturing company in Iran.
The decision issued Thursday also targeted entities in other countries that are partners to the Iranian auto sector, including the Indonesian “Golden Motorcycle” company and auto spare parts companies.
The new sanctions also affected major companies in the Iranian railway sector, including the state-owned “Islamic Republic of Iran Railway Company”, the “Raja” passenger train company, and the private shipping company “Rahahan Loading and Transporting”.
Among the parties concerned with the sanctions announced Thursday are major companies in the field of steel manufacturing and other industries in Iran, including the Heavy Equipment Production Company (HEPCO), which the US Treasury Department described as “one of the largest manufacturers of mining equipment and construction methods in the Middle East.”
Washington also imposed sanctions on the HEPCO branch in Shanghai.
The new sanctions list also included companies in the UAE and Germany accused of helping Iranian steel companies.
The new measures recently targeted what was described as a complex steel and oil export network run by two Iranian and Dominican citizens residing in Hong Kong.
The Pentagon is sending a third aircraft carrier and ships carrying Marines to the Middle East, adding between 9,000 and 10,000 military personnel, while President Donald Trump is considering resuming strikes on Iran after the midterm elections, according to the Wall Street Journal.
On Thursday, the newspaper quoted American officials as saying that ships, fighters, marines and sailors will arrive in the region by the end of November. The newspaper reported that Trump recently informed his aides that he expected the bombing of Iran to resume in the same month.
The aircraft carrier USS Theodore Roosevelt left its port in San Diego on Sunday on a scheduled deployment, while the amphibious ready group USS Makin Island, which includes three amphibious ships carrying elements of the 13th Marine Expeditionary Unit, sailed on Monday.
There are currently two aircraft carriers, the USS George H.W. Bush and the USS George Washington, in the Middle East. If the latter remains after Roosevelt's arrival, the number of strike groups led by aircraft carriers in the region will rise to three for the first time since April, before a fragile ceasefire is reached that temporarily ends the fighting that broke out on February 28.
The ceasefire later collapsed, and the two sides have exchanged attacks at intervals since then.
The newspaper indicated the possibility that the "George Washington" would leave the region and return to its port in Japan, which would bring the number of carriers back to two. The White House and the Department of Defense did not respond to the newspaper's requests for comment.
There are also ships from the USS Boxer amphibious ready group. One of the officials said that the military personnel on the ships that sailed this week will join more than 50,000 American military personnel present in the region.
The reinforcements come days after Trump rejected the latest Iranian proposal, and after he told Time magazine, in an interview published Thursday, that he might resume striking Iran after the midterm elections if there is no agreement. The Wall Street Journal said that the presence of a third carrier in the region would give Trump more options and firepower if he decided to launch an attack.
The proposal that Trump rejected would have led to the reopening of the Strait of Hormuz, through which about a fifth of the world's oil usually passes, and the resumption of talks on the Iranian nuclear program, in exchange for lifting the US blockade on Iranian ports.
In recent weeks, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth has extended the deployment of other units essential for major combat operations, including air defense units that confront Iranian missiles and drones, and the US Army's 82nd Airborne Division.
The newspaper explained that the 82nd Division is capable of carrying out multiple tasks, including responding to threats and parachuting into hostile territory to secure airports and ground sites.
According to US Navy officials, for months the United States has maintained about 20 warships in the region to enforce the blockade and help escort commercial ships crossing the Strait of Hormuz.
Between optimism about the possibility of achieving a breakthrough, and the threat of resumption of bombing, attempts to end the war between the United States and Iran fluctuate, while the faltering mediation reveals a disagreement that goes beyond the size of the concessions to the order of their implementation and guarantees.
As the war enters its eighth month, and the US midterm elections approach, both sides are clinging to pressure cards, without the mediators succeeding in converting the declared desire to negotiate into a settlement.
Axios' account of US Secretary of State Marco Rubio's request for the Iranian delegation to leave New York, and the Iranian denial of the "expulsion" incident, added a diplomatic confrontation to an impasse in which the calculations of the nuclear program, navigation security, and sanctions were intertwined.
Leaving with two novels
Axios quoted an American official and an informed source as saying that Rubio requested, on Monday evening, the departure of the Iranian delegation participating in the United Nations General Assembly meetings, after the White House’s expectations of progress in the talks were dashed. The request included Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi, who left with the delegation at dawn on Tuesday. The American official justified the move by saying that the meetings had ended and the Iranians had exceeded their “welcome period.”
But the Iranian mission denied that the departure was the result of an American order, stressing that the flight program was reported to the US State Department on September 17. Even the Axios story included a source's statement that Araqchi was originally scheduled to return to Tehran on Monday evening. Therefore, the fact of issuing the American request remains separate from the issue of its actual impact on the departure date, and it is not correct to present “expulsion” after it as an agreed-upon narrative. As for the reason for Rubio's move, American narratives link it to frustration at the lack of progress through Qatari mediation. It can be read politically as a message of tightening after the decline of optimism, but the published data do not prove that it is part of a decision to end negotiations. Mediation channels remained open, making it closer to escalating pressure within the diplomatic track than to announcing its end.
First step knot
The Iranian proposal, which was not officially published but was leaked and reported by the media, is to reopen the Strait of Hormuz within a week and resume nuclear talks, in exchange for lifting the naval blockade on Iranian ports, exempting oil sales from sanctions, and releasing frozen assets, in addition to a ceasefire on all fronts. However, Trump rejected the formula, reflecting the continuing disagreement over what Washington should get in exchange for easing pressure.
In an interview with Asharq Al-Awsat, Patrick Clausen, director of the Viterbi Program on Iran and American Policy at the Washington Institute, summarizes the essence of the difficulty by saying: “Trump wants both things: opening the Strait and making concessions on the nuclear program. Achieving either of them is difficult, and achieving them both is even more difficult. Clausen adds: “Each party, the United States and Iran, does not trust the other. Determining how to implement the concessions in phases will be a challenge; Each party wants to prove to the other that it will actually implement what it agreed to, before it implements its concessions.” This assessment places the problem on two overlapping levels: a dispute over the content of the deal, and another over the mechanism of its implementation. Resuming nuclear negotiations does not equal making specific nuclear concessions, just as the promise of sanctions relief does not equal Iran’s actual benefit from it.”
Reuters quoted an informed official as saying that the two sides largely agreed on the steps, but they differed on their arrangement. This is an indication of an existing negotiating space, and is not evidence of the completion of an agreement awaiting signing. The order of procedures practically determines who gives up a pressure card first, and what guarantees he will get it in return.
Time is an expensive weapon
After signs of optimism on Monday, Trump returned on Wednesday evening to threatening bombing or agreement. In an interview published by Time magazine on Thursday, he considered the intensification of strikes after the midterm elections “possible.” This wording leaves the military option open, but it does not mean taking a decision to resume it or setting a date for it.
Politically, linking the escalation to the post-election period suggests an attempt to convince Tehran that waiting will not necessarily give it better conditions. On the other hand, Iran is betting that the cost of the war and the pressures of the electoral process will push Washington to accept an interim settlement. But this remains an interpretation of possible calculations, and not a proven fact about the Iranian leadership’s decision.
Also, time does not work for free for the benefit of any party; Iran faces the continuation of the blockade, sanctions, and the dangers of new strikes, while the Trump administration faces the cost of prolonging the war and the possibilities of its expansion.
In his interview with TIME, Trump acknowledged the decline in stocks of some types of ammunition, while emphasizing work to increase production, which is a factor added to the calculations of escalation, without proving an inability to implement it.
In light of this, the next test for mediators appears to be to build mutually verifiable steps that prevent one of the parties from having to hand over their papers in advance. An interim settlement could ease maritime tension and open nuclear negotiations, but it will not succeed if Washington considers it a postponement of the nuclear entitlement, or Tehran sees it as a concession without guarantees. Between these two extremes, the risk of a return to bombing remains, even with the continued exchange of proposals.
