Can the US and Iran turn a ceasefire into a deal?

Can the US and Iran turn a ceasefire into a deal?

RT

The US-Iran ceasefire, which was announced last night by US President Donald Trump, brings a cautious sense of optimism and hope that the war may eventually come to an end. However, a ceasefire is not a peace agreement. The two-week pause in hostilities could unfold according to different scenarios: it could lead to meaningful negotiations and ultimately a comprehensive peace deal, or it could be terminated, and the conflict would enter a new phase. 

Moreover, we shouldn’t underestimate the fragility of such agreements. A ceasefire can be broken at any moment – within days or even hours. It’s entirely possible that Washington could abruptly change its stance; for instance, Trump might claim that Iran is acting in bad faith and use that as justification to end the ceasefire and resume military operations.

At the same time, the very structure of the ceasefire raises important questions. Reports indicate that the agreement includes a 10-point plan proposed by Iran, which the US has acknowledged as the basis for current negotiations. These talks are expected to take place in Islamabad, with Pakistan playing the role of mediator.

Both the ceasefire and America’s acceptance of Iran’s proposal as a foundation for negotiations raise many questions. If Iran has truly been “defeated” as Trump has repeatedly claimed during the 39 days of intense conflict, or if it has been “effectively destroyed” as his comments suggest, then why is Washington considering Tehran’s offers as a starting point for peace talks?

The aforementioned 10-point plan – which is said to form the basis for a potential peace agreement and which, at least rhetorically, Trump seems willing to discuss – deserves particular scrutiny. The points include commitments to non-aggression, continued Iranian control over the Strait of Hormuz, acceptance of Iran’s right to enrich uranium, the lifting of primary and secondary sanctions, the termination of UN Security Council resolutions and IAEA Board of Governors’ decisions, compensation payments to Iran, the withdrawal of American troops from the region, and the cessation of hostilities on all fronts, including in Lebanon.

However, upon closer examination, it becomes clear that many of these points are highly contentious and, in some cases, nearly impossible to implement. This is especially true regarding the demand for the withdrawal of US troops from the region. It’s hard to imagine that Washington would genuinely agree to such a move under pressure from Tehran. For the US, this would not just mean a military realignment; it would essentially dismantle a significant portion of its regional influence. Geopolitically speaking, such a decision would appear as a voluntary relinquishment of US interests cultivated over several decades, and would increase Iran’s geopolitical standing both regionally and globally.

Agreeing to this point would mean that the US is effectively endorsing a significant reduction of its geopolitical influence in the Middle East. Therefore, it’s reasonable to conclude that the US will be reluctant to take such a step. Moreover, with the 250th anniversary of the adoption of the Declaration of Independence coming up, it’s unlikely that Trump (who coincidentally is also celebrating his 80th birthday this year) would want to mark this occasion with what could be seen as a geopolitical capitulation.

Of particular interest is the point regarding Iran’s continued control over the Strait of Hormuz. Here, we may find one of the key geopolitical priorities. If we were to hypothetically assume that the US agreed to such a formulation, it would signify much more than mere acknowledgment of the status quo. Essentially, it would equate to recognizing Iran’s dominance over one of the most crucial strategic nodes in global energy trade. In other words, Washington would be indirectly acknowledging Tehran’s geopolitical triumph.

More...

Four Lessons Learned:

Iran has prevailed, and the Middle East has changed

RT

Indirect negotiations between Tehran and Washington, conducted through intermediaries, primarily Pakistan and, behind it, China, have produced a ceasefire. Trump may claim that Iran was cowed by his threats, but the reality is different.

A ceasefire under conditions where the Strait of Hormuz remains under Iranian control suggests that Tehran has not backed down. Washington, in effect, has.

It is too early to speak of any “golden age” emerging from these talks. But the outlines of the conflict’s outcome are already visible.

Iran has held firm.

For decades, Iran faced the threat of joint aggression by the United States and Israel. That threat has now been tested, and has failed to break Tehran. Neither Washington nor Tel Aviv proved capable of imposing their will by force.

The result is clear: Iran has consolidated its status as a major regional power, standing alongside Israel as one of the decisive actors in the Middle East.

The Gulf states have been exposed.

The Arab monarchies of the Persian Gulf have discovered both their vulnerability and their dependence. In a conflict between the US/Israel and Iran, they proved unable to defend their own interests. Meanwhile, American bases on their territory, far from guaranteeing security, became magnets for Iranian retaliation.

Conclusion: US security guarantees have been shown to be unreliable. This lesson will not be lost on Washington’s allies.

 Military power has reasserted primacy.

The conflict has underlined a broader truth about the emerging international order: military force outweighs economic and financial leverage.

Sanctioned Iran, burdened by economic difficulties, has effectively withstood, and in strategic terms defeated, a global superpower. Meanwhile, its far wealthier southern neighbors have been reduced to little more than spectators, or worse, targets.

Conclusion: In today’s world, hard power determines outcomes.

Iran has changed internally.

Iran has emerged from the conflict intact, but transformed. During the war, a shift long anticipated by analysts appears to have taken place. Real power has moved away from the clerical establishment and toward the security apparatus.

The country is no longer defined primarily by its formal leadership, but by the senior ranks of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps.

Conclusion: Iran will remain an Islamic republic, but one in which the IRGC plays the decisive role. Its policy is likely to be firm, disciplined and pragmatic.

Russia’s position

Moscow has navigated the conflict with a degree of strategic discipline. It has maintained its principles, calling aggression by its name, expressing solidarity with Iran, and vetoing what it viewed as an unbalanced UN Security Council resolution on the Strait of Hormuz.

At the same time, it has preserved working relations with key actors: explaining its position to Gulf partners, avoiding direct confrontation with Trump, and refraining from damaging ties with Israel.

The broader consequences of the conflict, a temporary spike in oil prices, strains in transatlantic relations, and a further diversion of US attention from Ukraine, have unfolded largely independently of Russia’s direct involvement.

Looking ahead

The war has opened new opportunities for Moscow. Iran, having endured a severe test, has strengthened its regional and international standing. This creates conditions for closer cooperation between Russia and Tehran.

More broadly, the outlines of a new Eurasian security architecture are becoming visible. Russia, China, Iran – alongside states such as Belarus and North Korea – form the core of this emerging system.

In the south, Iran has effectively halted an American geopolitical advance. In the west, Russia seeks to do the same in Ukraine. In the east, China continues to expand its military capabilities while advancing its diplomatic agenda.

It is through such developments, not declarations, but shifts in power and alignment, that a multipolar world is taking shape.

Oh, Great, Peace in the Middle East Again

Oh, Great, Peace in the Middle East Again

Robert Spencer

Well, it’s another glorious day, or something. President Donald Trump’s threats against the Islamic Republic of Iran have apparently worked, a “ceasefire” has been concluded, and as he did when he forced Israel to stop fighting Hamas when it had a chance to destroy the jihad terror group once and for all, Trump is once again hailing the dawn of peace in the Middle East:

A big day for World Peace! Iran wants it to happen, they’ve had enough! Likewise, so has everyone else! The United States of America will be helping with the traffic buildup in the Strait of Hormuz. There will be lots of positive action! Big money will be made. Iran can start the reconstruction process. We’ll be loading up with supplies of all kinds, and just “hangin’ around” in order to make sure that everything goes well. I feel confident that it will. Just like we are experiencing in the U.S., this could be the Golden Age of the Middle East!!! President DONALD J. TRUMP

The Islamic Republic of Iran was likewise in a celebratory mood, and in its joyful exuberance, fired off a round or two of celebratory missiles and drones into Israel and the Sunni states that it has targeted since the beginning of this conflict. Fox News’ Trey Yingst reported that on “Ceasefire day 1,” Israel “took multiple waves of Iranian missile fire after the ceasefire was announced. Kuwait reports that more than two dozens drones were launched by Iran since 8am. UAE is currently under an Iranian missile attack. Iran, via state media, reports strikes against Lavan Island and the oil infrastructure there.”

At least eleven people were injured in Israel, and attacked Qatar and Bahrain as well as the United Arab Emirates and Kuwait. The government of Israel says it supports the ceasefire but only if it is real, which it obviously isn’t. The Prime Minister’s Office announced: “Israel supports President Trump’s decision to suspend strikes against Iran for two weeks subject to Iran immediately opening the straits and stopping all attacks on the US, Israel and countries in the region.”

Maybe the Islamic Republic will now stop attacking Israel and other countries in the region. Or maybe the weakened regime’s surviving leaders will take a lesson from Trump’s inaction after Hamas repeatedly violated the ceasefire in Gaza, and from the indifference of previous American administrations to its flouting of all manner of agreements, includingthe vaunted Obama nuclear deal.

The Iranian Islamic regime, meanwhile, is presenting the agreement as an American surrender and acceptance of its nuclear program. The dissident Iranian news source Iran International reports that “Iran’s Farsi-language version of its ceasefire proposal includes ‘acceptance of enrichment,’ a provision not present in English versions, the Associated Press reported on Tuesday, highlighting discrepancies in how Tehran is presenting its terms.”

On the other hand, the Trump administration still declares that it will put pressure upon the Islamic Republic of Iran. Iran International also noted that “senior Trump administration officials told Israel that during the two-week negotiations, the US will firmly demand removal of Iran’s nuclear material, no nuclear enrichment, elimination of the ballistic missile threat, and more, Israel’s N12 reported on Tuesday.”

These demands, however, are hollow. Without military action, which Trump will become progressively less likely to resort to as the midterms approach, the U.S. has no leverage.

If the Islamic Republic of Iran remains in power, it will build up its strength again and then resume its jihad against Israel and the U.S. That’s one of the only two reasons truces are allowed in Islamic law: one is if the Infidel enemy converts to Islam, which is not in play here, and the other is if the enemy is winning, so as to give the warriors of jihad time to regroup and then fight again more effectively.

The Trump administration, like so many others before it, should have studied Islam and realized that the Islamic Republic is serious about Islam above all. Then it would have known that when the Islamic Republic’s leaders showed a willingness to conclude a ceasefire, they were tacitly admitting that they were losing. It was time to press forward to final victory, not to stop fighting. And so another opportunity to rid the world of a jihad threat is lost, another chimera of peace is announced, and the jihadis will rejoice that they have survived to fight another day, as yet another Western government has kicked the can down the road instead of defeating them.

IDF launches largest airstrikes yet on Hezbollah; Trump: Iran truce doesn’t cover Lebanon

IDF launches largest airstrikes yet on Hezbollah; Trump: Iran truce doesn’t cover Lebanon

Emanuel Fabian

The Israeli Air Force on Wednesday carried out its largest wave of airstrikes yet against Hezbollah, the military said, after announcing that it would keep fighting the Iran-backed terror group in Lebanon, despite the two-week ceasefire with Tehran that came into place hours earlier.

The prime minister of Pakistan, who mediated between the US and Iran, declared in his post announcing the two-week ceasefire overnight Wednesday-Thursday that it would cover Lebanon as well. Iran said the same, while Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s office has insisted that Israel’s strikes against Hezbollah would continue.

Trump weighed in on the issue later Wednesday, telling a PBS reporter during a phone interview that Lebanon was not included in the Iran ceasefire.

When asked why not, Trump responded: “Because of Hezbollah. They were not included in the deal. That’ll get taken care of too. It’s alright.”

Asked if he was okay with Israel’s ongoing strikes against Hezbollah, Trump said: “It’s part of the deal — everyone knows that. That’s a separate skirmish.”

The IDF strikes came as Hezbollah urged civilians not to return to southern Lebanon before, and as a Hezbollah official said the terror group had not publicly committed to the ceasefire because Israel had not either.

The Israel Defense Forces said its strikes targeted Beirut, the eastern Beqaa Valley and southern Lebanon. It issued evacuation warnings ahead of the strikes for Lebanese civilians in Beirut’s southern suburbs and areas of southern Lebanon.

A source in Lebanon’s civil defense reported dozens of people killed in Beirut, and the Lebanese health ministry called on people there to clear the roads to let ambulances through. At least a dozen people were killed in other strikes in the southern Lebanese cities of Sidon and Tyre, according to Lebanese authorities and state media.

Defense Minister Israel Katz said the strikes targeted “hundreds of Hezbollah operatives.”

Two military officials briefing Israeli reporters said the wave of airstrikes did not represent “closing strikes” of the campaign, and that the fighting against Hezbollah continues until Israel’s political leadership says otherwise.

More....

UPDATE: White House Pushes Back on Iran Terror Regime SHUTS DOWN Strait of Hormuz Again

UPDATE: White House Pushes Back on Iran Terror Regime SHUTS DOWN Strait of Hormuz Again

Jim Hᴏft

UPDATE: The Trump administration is pushing back hard against claims that the Strait of Hormuz has been fully shut down.

White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt dismissed the reports as misleading.

Leavitt stated that what Iran is signaling publicly does not match what is actually happening behind the scenes.

She went even further, revealing that direct communications to President Trump contradict the panic-inducing headlines.

“White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt said reports the strait is closed are “a case of what they’re saying publicly is different privately—we have seen an uptick in traffic in the strait today,” she said, adding, “it has been relayed to [Trump] privately” that the strait remains open “and these reports publicly are false.””

According to reports from Fox News’ Trey Yingst, the Strait of Hormuz is now effectively a hostage of the Iranian Navy.

While two vessels were permitted to pass early Wednesday after Trump’s initial announcement, the gates have since been slammed shut. Iran claims the “suspension” is a response to Israeli strikes against Hezbollah in Lebanon.

But the treachery doesn’t stop at the water’s edge. Reports indicate that an Iranian attack overnight successfully struck Saudi Arabia’s East-West oil pipeline.

This is a devastating blow to global markets, as that pipeline is the only viable alternative for Saudi crude exports when the Strait of Hormuz is blocked.

Fars News Agency, the official propaganda arm directly linked to Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), reported Wednesday that tanker traffic is now “suspended” after Israel continued hammering Hezbollah.

PBS journalist Elizabeth Landers confirmed that President Trump told her directly: Israel’s war against Hezbollah in Lebanon is NOT part of the ceasefire deal.

More...