The Crisis in Iran: Where Do We Find Common Ground?

In a region so vastly different than the United States and the West, simple misunderstandings can run rampant and severely inhibit diplomatic relations.   

By Katelyn Livorse

 

Since the start of 2026, the Iranian government has admitted to killing over 3,000 people, but some independent estimates reach as high as 36,000, with no end to the killing in sight.   

Recently, the United States and Iran have agreed to begin talks again, at the urging of several Arab nations, in Oman. While covering the news, Al Jazeera, used the headline US, Iran Struggle to Find Common Ground Ahead of Talks. The headline, perhaps unwittingly, sums up the sticking point in the relationship between the two nations. How can two countries, so different in culture, have any common ground? And if indeed they do, is it even possible for them to see it?   

 

The Iranian Context  

In a region so vastly different than the United States and the West, simple misunderstandings can run rampant and severely inhibit diplomatic relations.   

Beginning in 224 AD until 651 AD, the Sasanian Empire ruled a vast swath of land including modern-day Iran. During this time, Zoroastrianism, an ancient, monotheistic pre-Islamic faith, was both the state religion and the primary religion of the people, much like how Islam is today. Christianity existed in the region, but was a minority, as it is today. Iran has not had a government without a state religion since before this time.  

Around the time of Mohammed, Islam was first introduced to Persia through Arab conquest. Since then, Islam has dominated all aspects of Persian life and culture. 

Iran has seen many rulers, including the Seljuks, who ushered in the Islamic Golden Age, and even Genghis Khan. These rulers have all violently overthrown one another to gain power. A peaceful transfer of power did not occur, and blood was frequently shed even between hereditary successors. 

This precedent had long been set for Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, the current Supreme Leader of Iran and the successor of Ayatollah Ruhollah Khamenei, who founded the Islamic Republic of Iran after overthrowing the former Shah of Iran and his government in 1979.  

 

On the Contrary  

First, and perhaps the most obvious, is the absence of a state religion. There has been debate as long as the United States has existed over the role religion should or should not have in the public sector, but the government has never been required to follow a certain religious set of guidelines. Although the United States is a primarily Christian country, it has no obligation to continue as such. This sort of freedom is alien to those in Iran, just as the “one-way track,” or religion, is totally foreign to Americans.  

The transfer of power in American history has never been violent, excluding the actual American Revolution, of course. Presidents assume a non-hereditary office after being selected by the people. The former President passes the baton of power with no struggle, beyond the less-than-civil debates during the election season, and occasionally with a sigh of relief. Americans have never seen a violent regime change beyond the making of their own country, where such a thing was specifically designed to be unimaginable.  (READ MORE: Nigerian Christians are Being Murdered)

It also bears reiterating the difference in how half of the population in both countries is viewed so differently. In America, women are viewed, by the law, as equals to their male counterparts. In Iran, women are viewed as beings closer to objects than to people. Even girls as young as nine can be forced into marriage. 

Finally, the two cultures place a different emphasis on the “goal” of life. In the West, life is precious and meant to be lived. In more traditional Islamic practices, life is the road to death, and dying is the best part of being alive.  (READ MORE: Anti-Growth Policymaking and H-1B Visas) 

 

Where is the Common Ground? 

Frankly, there isn’t much. The frequent reports of the Iranian government killing protestors, hunting down doctors who treated injured protestors, and ordering families not to cry over their dead loved ones in public have led to outrage and protests in the West. Iran has also issued “massacre” threats and provoked U.S. military ships. The United States has gladly responded to their prodding and threats with its own, and by sending more military to the region. President Donald Trump has also not shied away from military action, as evidenced in June of 2025. Both leaders have also exchanged extensive threats, particularly over the issue of nuclear weapons.  

The differences come from one side wanting nuclear weapons, the other wanting to destroy them. One side wanting to remain in power, the other side happy to remove the other. And so on. The common ground comes from what the countries don’t want. There is one likely thing that both sides don’t want, and that would be an all-out war. Not an exchange of strikes or another bombing mission like that from last year, but a full-blown war that could easily end up – and perhaps can even be said to be likely to end up – just as disastrous as all the other ones in the Middle East.   

Simply put, this would be a rather bad look for the “President of Peace” and disastrous for Iran – and the Middle East. Iran cannot win a war against the United States. Iran knows this, but they cannot admit this.  

 

The Starting Point 

Identifying the common ground is the most basic starting point. From there, well, I’m no expert on the Middle East and can’t predict what will happen next.  

Iran is certainly at a disadvantage militarily, but the United States could also be said to have a disadvantage culturally. The Ayatollah has less to worry about when it comes to protecting innocents, merely relying on the West to turn a blind eye to his activities, – and is happily doing work on nuclear sites. The United States, on the other hand, is under obligation by its own people to do so and must find a way to diplomatically pressure Iran to capitulate to its demands, or decide to pitch another war in the Middle East to the American people.  

 

 

About the Author

Katelyn Livorse is a senior political science and French major. She is marketing fellow at the Institute for Faith and Freedom and editor-in-chief of Checkpoint News.

In the summer of 2025, Katelyn interned at the U.S. House of Representatives in Rep. Mike Kelly’s office (PA-16). There, she had the opportunity to learn about constituent relations, attend briefings, and foster American-Irish relationships.

Katelyn has also previously worked as a translator for the Jews of the Somme Project. There, she translated French documents written during the Nazi occupation of France detailing the persecution of the Jewish population. Upon graduation, she hopes to pursue a career in international relations.

READ MORE BY KATELYN LIVORSE: Anti-Growth Policymaking and H-1B Visas

 

Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed are those of the writer alone and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of Grove City College, the Institute for Faith and Freedom, or their affiliates.

 

Cover Image: Alan Hughes, Wikimedia Commons (License) (Cropped)

Image 1: Wikimedia Commons (Public Domain)