Comments on the author’s looks are really childish and counter-productive. I looked but could not find an details on her background except that she is a Visiting Professor at Georgetown U and has been involved in the negotiations at some level. Her piece in Foreign Policy suggests that she is sympathetic to the current regime in Iran. For example, she offers not a single word of criticism for any of the regime’s policies and is, therefore, an apologist for them - IMHO. She does seem to know the actors’s names but actually provides little information on Iran’s objectives or concerns. In all, the FP piece, like this one, is singularly uninformative and certainly gives no evidence that she knows what is going on.
https://foreignpolicy.com/2015/04/04/dont-fear-the-hardliners-iran-nuke-deal-zarif-khamenei/
Her Atlantic screed is as stupid as it is presumptuous:
This isn’t to say that Iranians endorse their leadership’s positions, but that their main concern lies in the price of day-to-day items and goods, such as poultry and eggs, as well as unemployment and access to services.
That's it. The people don't have enough bread and circuses. If Trump supports this rabble and turns off the money spigot O opened to the mullahs and thugs:
..it’ll at best deter Iranians from joining the movement and making their voices heard, and will at worst help the hardliners, undermine the protesters, and facilitate the crackdown
But this crackdown will come from the comparatively marginal hardline mullahs, along with the " surprisingly flexible" Guard. Of course, this will be all Trumps fault because he doesn't understand that hunger and financial destitution are not important enough to propel a genuine revolution.