Trump had to postpone tough issues to reopen Hormuz
The temporary agreement that the Trump administration announced with Iran this weekend does not constitute a peace deal. It is not a nuclear agreement. It is not a missile agreement. Those may yet materialise — potentially in a few months, although a senior United States official indicated that there was no established timeframe for nuclear discussions, or perhaps much later if the historical context of negotiations with Iran is any indication. However, at this juncture, Trump has secured a deal that may prolong a cease-fire and facilitate the reopening of the Strait of Hormuz, thereby alleviating the most significant energy disruption in contemporary history. The most encouraging development from this high-stakes negotiation between Washington and Tehran, facilitated by a staunch Pakistani general, is that a situation that had the potential to escalate significantly seems to be moving towards de-escalation. Assuming that both President Trump and Iran’s supreme leader, currently in hiding to evade assassination attempts, give their approval to the final wording, the critical passage through which a significant portion of the world’s oil flows is expected to reopen. That is a significant consideration at a moment when Republicans were apprehensive about entering the November midterm elections with petrol prices around $4.50 per gallon and a president engaged in a conflict that a majority of Americans indicate they oppose in polls. For the Iranians, the opening arrives at a critical juncture, as their beleaguered economy seems poised to falter, primarily due to the significant decline in oil revenue. However, for a president who had proclaimed merely 11 weeks prior that “there will be no deal with Iran except UNCONDITIONAL SURRENDER,” the agreement he revealed this weekend fell significantly short of that assertion. His tone exhibited a notable divergence. “The negotiations are proceeding in an orderly and constructive manner, and I have informed my representatives not to rush into a deal as time is on our side,” he wrote on social media.
Until the supreme leader and other Iranian officials certify the understanding, “the Blockade will remain in full force and effect,” he wrote. He emphasised, “There can be no mistakes!” Our relationship with Iran is evolving into a significantly more professional and productive one. Yet Trump essentially acquiesced to the Iranian demand to defer the most challenging issues — while seemingly managing to compel the Iranians to temporarily relinquish their grip on one of the world’s most crucial waterways. Ultimately, both parties found themselves with limited options, necessitating concessions from each side. They selected the least unfavourable among what each perceived as undesirable alternatives. However, this action merely initiates a return to the status quo that existed around February 28, when Trump and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel commenced a military campaign aimed at conclusively terminating Iran’s nuclear and missile initiatives. Thus far, the objectives have not been met: Iran continues to hold over 11 tonnes of nuclear fuel, which includes 970 pounds nearing bomb-grade quality — albeit concealed beneath debris, deep underground. An initial scheme aimed at effectively executing a coup to topple the government and install former Iranian hard-liner Mahmoud Ahmadinejad as president did not come to fruition. If the strait does reopen, Trump’s aides indicate that they are preparing to enter a second phase aimed at resuming serious negotiations with the Iranians regarding the issues that precipitated the conflict. A senior administration official informed on Sunday that the Iranians had broadly consented to relinquish their 60-percent enriched uranium — the stockpile capable of being transformed into approximately a dozen bombs in a relatively brief timeframe.
However, the Iranians have remained silent regarding the surrender of that fuel, which, coupled with their ability to disrupt traffic in the strait, constitutes their most significant leverage. The US official also acknowledged that the precise method by which Iran would eliminate its highly enriched uranium is still unclear, as is the question of whether Iran will ultimately export all of the additional uranium it holds, as stated by the International Atomic Energy Agency. The United States reported that the Iranians had verbally consented to a form of suspension regarding the enrichment of new nuclear fuel. Trump recently informed that the leaders in Tehran had retreated from their earlier pledge to halt that activity for a duration of 20 years, leaving the current status of their position on the matter uncertain. Iran has thus far declined to engage in discussions regarding constraints on the size and range of its missiles, a stipulation that the United States has indicated it would demand. That is a significant concern for the Israelis, who are within range of numerous Iranian ballistic missiles. Despite the confidence expressed by the United States that all those issues would be resolved, it appeared plausible that the negotiations and fragile cease-fire could falter at any moment. The US official briefing reporters on Sunday consistently recognised the uncertainty surrounding Iran’s potential agreements, as well as the possibility that the supreme leader may not provide formal approval.
However, the official indicated that the reopening of the strait, which would not entail any Iranian tolls, would alleviate economic pressure, restore confidence in the markets, and provide an opportunity to tackle the nuclear concerns. The official did not specify how the United States would respond to Iran’s assertion over the past three months that it now possesses sovereignty over the strait, which has historically been navigated as international waters. However, the official indicated that the agreement with the Trump administration represented a “walk-back” by the Iranians, as they will not be imposing tolls. Trump further fuelled scepticism on Sunday afternoon by stating on social media, “If I make a deal with Iran, it will be a good and proper one, not like the one made by Obama,” referring to the 2015 agreement that limited Iran’s nuclear activities without completely eradicating them. “Our deal is fundamentally different, yet it remains unseen and unknown to all. It isn’t even fully negotiated yet,” he acknowledged. “So don’t heed the naysayers, who express criticism regarding matters they are ill-informed about.” Among the “losers” were notable figures within Trump’s own party. Republican Iran hawks asserted that he capitulated to pressure and did not complete the task at hand. Among the most vocal detractors was Senator Roger Wicker, a Republican from Mississippi and the chair of the Senate Armed Services Committee, who cautioned that “everything accomplished by Operation Epic Fury would be for naught!” Mike Pompeo, exhibited a similar dismissive attitude. This prompted Steven Cheung, the White House communications director, to take to social media, asserting that Pompeo “should shut his stupid mouth and leave the real work to the professionals.”
Veteran negotiators who had previously opposed the attacks expressed their scepticism as well. “This is what happens when a poorly conceived war of choice turns into a highly flawed ‘peace’ of necessity,” stated Aaron David Miller, currently affiliated with the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, on Sunday. “Original, unrealisable war aims abandoned,” he stated, “and now little leverage to secure what truly matters — restraining Iran’s nuclear capacity and permanently opened straits.” Until a few days ago, the Trump administration maintained that it would not engage in any agreement that did not address the most challenging issue from the outset: the nuclear program. However, administration officials yielded — partly due to the necessity of reopening the strait and partly because they have acknowledged the intricacies involved in negotiating Iran’s extensive nuclear infrastructure, a process that consumed nearly two years for the Obama administration and culminated in a 160-page agreement. You can’t do a nuclear thing in 72 hours on the back of a serviette’, Secretary of State Marco Rubio stated during an interview in New Delhi, where he was engaged in a diplomatic mission. “The straits must be reopened without delay, after which we will engage, under mutually agreed parameters, in substantive discussions regarding enrichment, the highly enriched uranium, and their commitment to forgo nuclear weapons.”
When questioned about Trump’s apparent shift in stance, the US official indicated that Iran was making considerable concessions, yet the most challenging decisions remained on the horizon. Two remaining mysteries are how the United States will ultimately address Iranian demands regarding the unfreezing of billions of dollars in frozen Iranian assets, as well as the potential lifting of years-long sanctions imposed to restrict Iran’s ability to sell oil or procure goods and technology. The US official indicated that those issues — some of the most contentious for the financially constrained Iranian government — had yet to be addressed, although he left the door open for the possibility that they could be included in a trade agreement. “No dust, no dollars,” the official stated, alluding to Trump’s frequent mentions of “nuclear dust,” a term he uses to describe the highly enriched uranium predominantly located at the nuclear facility in Isfahan, which the United States targeted with airstrikes last June. Trump has indicated that he would not return Iran’s cash, drawing a comparison to President Barack Obama, who returned $1.7 billion to Iran for undelivered weapons from the 1970s. Obama “gave Iran massive amounts of CASH, and a clear and open path to a Nuclear Weapon,” Trump wrote Sunday on social media. “Our agreement stands in stark contrast.” However, regarding those issues, no agreement has been reached, as Trump himself acknowledged.
