The ceasefire in the Iran War was arranged partly through maneuvers rooted in past American diplomatic efforts. One involved Pakistan as a conduit to Tehran and Beijing. Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner traveled a well-trod path, as Henry Kissinger did in 1971, using Pakistan as a lever to backchannel the People’s Republic of China.

For his part, Donald Trump essentially followed Richard Nixon’s detente strategy. He also tended to use the “madman theory,” which RN thought might convince the North Vietnamese to come to a settlement. Trump’s methods were far louder than Nixon’s, who preferred back-channel communication to public pronouncements, finding these less subtle and messier.

However, Nixon, despite stealth and maneuver, also experienced difficulty. Turned out the Joint Chiefs of Staff, led by Admiral Thomas Moorer, were keeping tabs on Kissinger using a Naval Intelligence asset, Charles Radford, to spy on Nixon’s National Security Chief. Many in the military feared that Nixon might turn on Saigon’s regime, led by Nguyen Van Thieu. And they bitterly opposed any new initiative toward China or Moscow.

Trump suggested that China may have helped, through its ally Pakistan, to get Iran back to the negotiating table. These maneuverings suggest that Trump might be reevaluating his foreign policy. Certainly, some of these actions suggest that a flirtation with Neo-Conservatives, such as Marco Rubio, has come to an end. Instead, he has returned to the Witkoff-Kushner approach of finding common ground.

Certainly, Trump sent a signal to Russia that he was amenable to an improvement of relations by allowing ships to dock in Cuba despite an American oil blockade. He also lifted sanctions on Russian and Iranian oil. It was a classic mid-course correction. Also, little has come out of Venezuela as Trump seemingly is “bored” with trying to return to gunboat diplomacy.

Maybe he might also be miffed that he was sold a bill of goods by Benjamin Netanyahu, as well as by hardliners, who did little good in urging Trump to go down the militant path. Certainly, the President dislikes the martial route instinctively and is irritated with hardliners who led him down the path of war. Clearly, the President is uncomfortable with this route and eager to return to other aspects of his agenda.

Trump, by nature, believes war is a big expense and that timetables count. With Iran taking control of the Strait of Hormuz, the President may wish to return to trusting his own intuition. A deal ending the conflict in both the Middle East and Ukraine would complete Trump’s vision of uniting the great powers, China and Russia, with the United States enjoying senior status. Maybe a repeat of the Suez crisis of 1956 is preferred to a long, unproductive war. A comprehensive peace might just be what Trump desires.