In the aftermath of Iran’s strike against two airbases, in retaliation for the drone strike that killed Qasem Soleimani last week, a sigh of relief was breathed, but for what? That there had been no casualties from Iran’s cruise missiles was a huge reason to be thankful. (U.S. officials have since suggested this was intentional.) But there was also a sense of relief that Trump had stepped back—as if he were the wild card. The developments laid bare what diplomats I spoke with identified as a discomforting reality in the Trump era. “Up is down and down is up,” a former U.S. ambassador in the region told me, noting Iran’s decision to notify the Iraqis ahead of the attack on Tuesday and Mohammad Javad Zarif’s message of détente in the face of Trump’s bluster. “Who would’ve imagined that it’s the American president who is a crazy person gunning for war and the mullahs who are being careful and deliberate and cautious…. They have done terrible things—I am not going to defend the fact that the country holds hostages and has absolutely supported terrorist groups and those sorts of things—but from a political standpoint, they have behaved a hell of a lot more rationally and predictably than we have,” this person added. “Do you take comfort in the fact that Iran is the rational actor or does that scare the bejesus out of you even more?”

A former Foreign Service Officer who worked on Iran under Barack Obama echoed the point. “I think it is interesting that [Iran has taken] every opportunity to show that they’re actually more responsible than the U.S. president in executing this conflict,” this person said. “It boggles the mind to me that we are almost more concerned, I think, about our own president than we are about the way others may retaliate, which is really scary.”

Diplomats I spoke with are clear-eyed in their belief that Iran’s retaliation for Soleimani is not complete; they are bracing for—if not further military attacks—subsequent responses, such as cyberattacks or even kidnappings. To a fault, they, too, are not defending Iran’s past malfeasance. And Trump’s position on the wake of the attacks is welcomed by veterans of Foggy Bottom. “President Trump made the right decision not to respond to Iran’s missile attacks. There were no American casualties and the Iranians are clearly signaling they don’t want a war,” Nicholas Burns, the former ambassador to NATO, told me. The problem is that Trump has thus far failed to chart a path forward with Iran. Instead, he has shuttled between slamming Iran, slighting his predecessor’s signature Iran nuclear deal, and patting himself on the back for the death of Soleimani and Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, the former leader of the Islamic State whom the United States killed in October. “His speech was confusing about his strategy. It is not at all clear if he intends to contain Iran through deterrence or to weaken its government and seek regime change,” Burns added. “He owes the American public, the Congress, and our allies a much more specific and consistent game plan. Otherwise, it will be difficult for him to gain domestic and allied support.”

As I reported in the aftermath of the Soleimani’s killing last week, a chief concern within the diplomatic ranks was that the Trump administration, still lacking a coherent foreign policy, had failed to adequately contemplate and prepare for the international and Iranian response to the airstrike against the top Iranian general. Indeed, the Trump administration certainly appeared to be caught flat-footed when the Iraqi parliament voted to expel U.S. troops from the country over the weekend. While asserting that the killing of Soleimani left Americans safer, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and Defense Secretary Mark Esper have yet to detail the imminent threat they claim the Iranian general posed to U.S. interests. And Trump’s remarks on Wednesday arguably raised more questions than they answered. As the former ambassador in the region put it, “There is no strategy. It is satisfying Trump’s ego at every step. It’s all it is for us, there is zero strategy and it’s all strategy on Iran’s side.”