US President Donald Trump says he is in a "decision phase" on Iran and that "in the not too distant future" some "very big things" could happen. That is not a quote from a speech but from a conversation with Fox News correspondent Trey Yingst, who then relayed it on camera. The phrasing is vague enough to mean anything - and heavy enough that nobody can ignore it.

According to Yingst, Trump listed the three options facing Washington: keep up the military pressure on Iran, let the country weaken further economically, or try to reach a deal. And then he said the line that travelled around the world: "My question is if and when - do I blow up the whole country? They had better watch their behaviour." A state of more than 90 million people, reduced to a question of mood.

At the same time, Trump says he would probably be open to a meeting with Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian, who is due in New York this week for the UN General Assembly. So, in one breath: "do I blow it up" and "I would sit down at the table". Diplomacy as poker - except the stake is not his.

In Washington, Yingst says, Iran is viewed as two currents. On one side the "more moderate" figures around Pezeshkian and foreign minister Abbas Araghchi; on the other, people tied to the Revolutionary Guard, whom the US claims continue planning attacks on American forces and interests in the Middle East. The problem, the administration admits, is that it struggles to find anyone in the regime it can actually strike a deal with. Trump described some Iranian officials as people who "hide like rats".

When the anchor asked whether "the not too distant future" meant hours or days, Yingst had no answer. No deadline, no decision - only a signal that something is being prepared. At the same time Trump played down the security warnings issued in recent days to American citizens in the Middle East: this weekend, he says, is no different from any other.

The Balkans have a long memory of what it means when a great power "thinks out loud" about a smaller state. The question that remains is simple: when the commander-in-chief of the world's most powerful army openly wonders whether to "blow up an entire country", does it even matter what he decides - or is the damage already done by the asking?