Belgium

Brussels, September 23, 2026. At the United Nations podium on Tuesday, Donald Trump summarized his dilemma over Iran in a memorable question: "Do I send them to hell?" He presented it as his choice between an agreement and the annihilation of the Islamic Republic. A few minutes later, he announced the resumption of dialogue with Tehran, revealed during a press conference alongside Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky. The Belgian press first notes this great divide. La Libre Belgique, in a severe editorial, sees it as "a finding of failure": seven months after the outbreak of war against Iran, Washington is reduced to hoping to restore the previous situation, a Strait of Hormuz "open without hindrance to navigation". The editorialist speaks of a resounding fiasco "facing a power that is ultimately medium-sized" and a global economy "plunged into chaos".

On the substance of the discussions, La Libre reports that the meeting in New York lasted three hours, led on the American side by Steve Witkoff — "I feel very good", he said — and Jared Kushner, both of whom were already present during the interrupted talks in June. A new session is announced "in the very near future". The DH notes that, according to Iranian state television Irib, Tehran communicated its conditions for reopening the strategic strait during these exchanges, and that Trump now links any agreement to the electoral calendar: a compromise would be possible after the November midterm elections, where his party risks losing Congress due to high fuel prices.

The VRT, via its US specialist Bert De Vroey, situates this double discourse in a broader register: a tone deemed more moderate than in 2024 towards the UN itself — Trump having thanked the Security Council twice — but frontal attacks on UNESCO and the International Criminal Court, as well as a defense of American strikes in Venezuela deemed incompatible with the organization's principles. La Libre adds the mention, deemed revealing, of trade with Belarus rather than Canada. For the Belgian press, it is not the threat itself that makes sense, but the inconsistency of a diplomacy that spares authoritarian regimes while brandishing the annihilation of a UN member state.