The controversy has intensified within Iran after the New York Times revealed that a meeting took place on November 16, 2024, between Amiri Saeed Iravani, Iran’s representative at the UN, and Elon Musk, an advisor to the elected U.S. President Donald Trump. The report indicated that the meeting—requested by Musk and arranged based on Iravani’s preferences—addressed ongoing disputes between Iran and the United States, particularly regarding Iran’s support for armed militias in the region and the nuclear deal.
Notably, Iran deliberately delayed its official response to this report, while some state media quickly seized upon it and published excerpts. The official denial of the meeting occurred after certain newspapers, especially Kayhan, launched a fierce campaign accusing Iravani of “naivety” and “betrayal.” The campaign also directed accusations at members of President Masoud Bezhakian’s government, such as his strategic affairs aide Mohammad Javad Zarif, suggesting he seeks to replicate the experience of former President Hassan Rouhani, referencing negotiations with former President Barack Obama’s administration that ultimately led to the nuclear agreement between Iran and the P5+1 on July 14, 2015.
Multiple Motivations
Iran’s delay in responding to a report that garnered considerable attention from various regional and international powers can be interpreted through several motivations, primarily:
The Possibility of an Actual Meeting: Despite Iran’s denial of the meeting, this does not diminish the likelihood that it may have occurred. It was notable that the Iranian mission to the UN refrained from commenting on the news before it was denied by Iran’s Foreign Ministry. The transition team for the new President Donald Trump took a similar stance, with spokesman Stephen Chung stating, “We have no comment on private meetings that may or may not have taken place.” Arranging this meeting might align with Iran’s strategic interests during this period as it seeks insight into the policies the new U.S. administration will adopt regarding relations with Iran. This is a pivotal issue that the administration is expected to focus on, particularly given the “pressing” unresolved conflicts between the two sides, especially the nuclear deal, which faces a tough test in 2025 as the so-called “day of reckoning” approaches on October 18, 2024.
Attempts to Undermine President Bezhakian: The escalating debate surrounding the alleged meeting has partly become a focal point for political strife between reformist and hardline conservative factions. This aligns with the conclusion of the first hundred days of President Bezhakian’s term, prompting some media outlets to engage in what could be termed a “performance review” of his presidency. Media affiliated with the hardline factions emphasized that the alleged meeting was arranged through some members of Bezhakian’s team, particularly Zarif. The intent here appears to be to convey to the domestic sphere that the current president is politically weak and unable to manage his government team or control their political movements, which could, in the view of conservatives, have severe consequences for Iran’s interests, particularly with respect to the “failed” nuclear deal, from which Iran did not gain strategic advantages after Trump withdrew the U.S. from it on May 8, 2018, reinstating sanctions against Iran starting August 7 of that year.
Adopting a “Division of Roles” Policy: Iran may be leveraging this controversy to continue its approach of “dividing roles” or “speaking with multiple voices.” In its view, this policy aids in expanding its options and freedom of movement on both regional and international stages, particularly in light of current circumstances regarding ongoing conflicts, such as the war Israel is waging in Gaza and Lebanon, potential military escalation between Israel and Iran, or Trump’s return to the White House following his victory in the November 5, 2024, elections. Furthermore, this strategy could bolster Iran’s negotiating position in confronting the upcoming Trump administration, especially as the latter hints at the possibility of reinstating a “maximum pressure” policy on January 20, 2025. This suggests that Iran aims to gain numerous strategic advantages in any potential negotiations with Trump’s administration moving forward, compensating for losses incurred due to the war Israel has waged since October 7, 2023. Perhaps this is why Iran conveyed messages with multiple meanings during the visit of the Director General of the International Atomic Energy Agency, Rafael Grossi, to Tehran on November 13, 2024, indicating its potential willingness to respond to Western demands for increased cooperation with the agency, while simultaneously asserting its unpreparedness to negotiate under pressure or threats from these nations.
Sending Mixed Messages to Allies: It is noteworthy that this controversy coincided with the visit of Ali Larijani, the Supreme Leader’s advisor, to Syria and Lebanon on November 14 and 15, 2025, where he met with Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, Lebanese caretaker Prime Minister Najib Mikati, and Lebanese Speaker of Parliament Nabih Berri, along with leaders of Iranian-affiliated factions. While Larijani delivered two specific messages from Khamenei to Assad and Berri, the more significant messages engendered by this controversy, particularly to Syria, have drawn Iran’s specific concerns about the Syrian regime’s policy in the current regional war and its escalatory stance. Iran is worried that Syria’s neutrality and reluctance to engage in the conflict could escalate into limiting Hezbollah’s movements within Syria and its military support channels from Syria to Lebanon. Thus, the Iranian regime aimed to initially convey an idea of openness to dealing with the Trump administration and potential negotiations, signaling to the Syrian regime that any shift in its policy toward leveraging the current war to improve relations with Western nations, especially the U.S., would not proceed without Iran’s approval, as the Iranian regime believes it possesses the ability to disrupt such arrangements. The Iranian regime is also keen to communicate this message to those seeking to exploit Hezbollah’s weakened state following Israeli military strikes in order to compel it to withdraw to the Litani River and facilitate electing a president who may not align with their interests. The core message here indicates that any political or security arrangements formulated in Lebanon in the upcoming period will not translate into actionable steps on the ground without Iran’s green light.
Desired Understandings
In conclusion, although Iran’s late denial of a meeting between Iravani and Musk does not negate its intention to establish communication channels with the Trump administration before it formally takes office, it aims to prevent escalating tensions between the two sides and may seek to avoid options that do not align with its interests by early 2025.
