Iran general says he trusts taxi driver more than Trump as US-Tehran rift deepens

A senior Iranian Revolutionary Guard figure has dismissed President Donald Trump as “short-sighted” and “childish,” saying he would place more faith in a taxi driver’s word than in the US leader’s statements — a pointed sign of the distrust now shaping Tehran’s approach to Washington.

Brig Gen. Mohammad Reza Naqdi, an adviser to the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), made the remarks in a video circulated widely online this week as tensions persist over US-Iran diplomacy, military pressure and the Strait of Hormuz.

“The current president of the United States is extremely short-sighted and childish,” Naqdi said. “He has no long-term vision.” He added that Trump’s statements had “no foundation or consistency,” arguing that “I trust a taxi driver much more than I trust him.”

Naqdi’s comments went beyond personal criticism of Trump. He portrayed shifting US statements as a "strategic weakness", saying the president did not consider the consequences of his public remarks even 24 hours later.

The IRGC adviser also claimed that Trump’s words had weakened the United States’ global standing.

These assertions, posted on X by Iran Observer among others, are political claims by a senior official in Iran’s elite security establishment and have not been independently verified.

The video was initially amplified by Iran-focused accounts and has since been reported by multiple outlets.

It appears to reinforce Tehran’s public position that it should not place confidence in US assurances or negotiations without firm, enforceable commitments.

The remarks come amid renewed confrontation over the Strait of Hormuz, the narrow shipping route used by Gulf producers to move a substantial share of the world’s seaborne oil and liquefied natural gas.

Naqdi claimed the US had failed to achieve its objectives against Iran, including alleged ambitions to overthrow the Iranian government, divide the country and establish control over the strategic waterway.

Trump has earlier made pronouncements about a regime-change in Tehran, but has not publicly endorsed the other alleged goals.

Iran has used the Hormuz crisis to argue that regional security cannot be determined by US military power alone. Washington, meanwhile, has long maintained that freedom of navigation through the strait is a core security interest.

The exchange illustrates the core obstacle in any future US-Iran engagement: neither side believes the other’s promises will endure.

For Tehran, the collapse or expiration of prior understandings, together with rapid shifts in US messaging, is cited as evidence that political assurances from Washington are insufficient.

For the United States, Iran’s missile activity, pressure on Gulf shipping and support for regional armed groups have fueled deep skepticism over Iranian commitments.

Naqdi’s taxi-driver line is blunt rhetoric, but it conveys a more consequential message: Iranian security officials appear unwilling to treat verbal de-escalation signals from Washington as reliable unless they are backed by concrete terms and credible enforcement mechanisms.