|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
Welcome to The Geopolity’s What We’re Watching (3W), our daily look at the interconnected worlds of Geopolitics, Economics and Energy. Curated from the world’s leading sources of information, our analysis and commentary is designed to help you make sense of the events driving the major developments in the world.
Last Friday Pakistan’s top military commander and effective national leader, field marshal Asim Munir, travelled to Iran as part of an effort to reach a deal under which the US and Iran would agree to end the war, writes Axios. According to Reuters, a Qatari delegation joined Munir. Both Munir and the Qatari’s travelled on the basis of close coordination with the US. Axios adds that at that time, Iran’s Foreign Ministry said a deal was not close, but that negotiations were ongoing. The negotiations were limited to the ending the war and enabling free movement of ships through the Strait of Hormuz. “Issues related to the nuclear file are not supposed to be discussed in detail at this stage,” it said. However, US secretary of state Rubio in statements to the press said the fundamental US demand is that “Iran can never have a nuclear weapon. It just cannot.” Rubio also said a deal would have to address Iran’s stockpile of highly enriched uranium and its enrichment policy going forward.
He further said Iran must not be allowed to set up “tolls” in the Strait of Hormuz. 3W notes that this makes clear that on Friday the negotiations positions remained as far apart as they have been since the start of the war.
Nevertheless, after Pakistani field marshal Munir then left Iran on Saturday, US president Trump gave the impression the negotiators had gotten much closer to a deal. Trump told Axios it was a “solid 50/50” as to whether he would be able to make a “good” deal or else “blow them to kingdom come.” Later on Saturday Trump then had a video meeting with the leaders of the Arabian Gulf countries, as well as Pakistan, Turkey and Egypt. Iran’s foreign ministry also changed its tone on Saturday, saying that Iran and the US were in the final stage of discussions on a memorandum of understanding to end the war. It added that the deal would gradually reopen the Strait of Hormuz, lifting the US naval blockade on Iran and releasing frozen Iranian funds. A 30-60 day period of negotiations on a detailed ceasefire and nuclear agreement would follow. According to Axios, Israeli prime minister Netanyahu did not see eye-to-eye with Trump on the negotiations and insisted on a relaunch of the US – Israel Alliance War on Iran. In the 3W view, the fact that US senator Lindsey Graham also called upon Trump to restart fighting essentially confirms Axios’ description of Israel’s position on the negotiations. US senator Graham is a mouthpiece for the Israeli’s, namely.
In the 3W view, if the Iranians have paid any attention to events across the Middle East over the past few years, they should know that the US proposal is completely fake. In fact, a trap
Then after the video meeting Trump said that a deal to end the war with Iran would be announced “shortly” and that the “final aspects” were being negotiated, writes Axios. Trump reportedly also spoke to the leaders of the Arabian Gulf countries, and Israel’s prime minister Netanyahu, in private video calls, to tell them about the progress of the negotiations. The message from the Arabian Gulf countries was, “Please stop the war for the benefit of the whole region”, Axios says. Iran’s foreign ministry also said that Iran and the US were in the final stage of discussions on a memorandum of understanding to end the war.
As to what is said to have been agreed, Axios writes it is a memorandum of understanding (MOU) that will last 60 days and could be extended by mutual consent. During the 60-day period, the Strait of Hormuz will be open with no tolls and Iran will clear the mines it deployed in the strait to let ships pass freely. In exchange, the US will lift its blockade on Iranian ports and issue some sanctions waivers to allow Iran to sell oil freely. The MOU also includes a clause stipulating that the US – Israel Alliance War on Lebanon is to end. But, according to Axios, Iran is to move first, after which the US will “reward” Iran by doing what it has promised. Axios also says the MOU does not include permanent sanctions relief for Iran, or immediate and complete return of Iranian assets seized by the US. The US only “agreed to negotiate” over these matters during the 60-day period of the MOU. And regarding Lebanon, Israel will be allowed to return to attacking the country if “Hezbollah rearms of instigates attacks”.
In the 3W view, if the Iranians have paid any attention to events across the Middle East over the past few years, they should know that the US proposal is completely fake. In fact, a trap.
In Gaza, the ceasefire deal included a clause about restarting talks on the establishment of a Palestinian State at some stage in the future. Everyone knows this was only put in there to give the impression of fairness, but that there is no sincere intent on the side of the US – Israeli Alliance to move into that direction. The Iranians should understand that “sanctions wavers” coupled with a promise to “negotiate” permanent sanctions relief is an Alliance ploy along the same lines.
In Lebanon, the original ceasefire deal after the killing of Hassan Nasrallah included the exact same clause that if Hezbollah was considered by Israel to do anything, Israel could attack again. As a result of this clause, effectively the attacks by Israel on Lebanon never stopped. Ever. Not a single day.
Therefore, what would happen if Iran were to agree to this deal is the following. The moment Iran makes the first move, it solves the immediate problem the US is faced with, which is the collapse of the global economy. As soon as Iran allows oil and gas tankers to move through the Strait of Hormuz again, it will have bought time for the US. The US can then renege on its promises and comfortably take its time to replan the destruction of Iran.
…Iran’s response to the Alliance’s war has been outstanding. So outstanding that at present it holds the upper hand, since the Alliance lost more (its bases and air defenses in the region
Iran’s leadership, as well China and Russia who might be pushing Tehran to accept a deal out of fear for economic Armageddon, should know that a deal with the US only works if the US is obliged to move first. It is in Iran’s moral right to demand this, since it did not start this war. It is also a practical necessity that Iran insists on this moral right. The moral reason is that the Alliance started this war. It attacked Iran twice, under the cover of negotiations, without there having a declaration of war. The practical reason is that Iran’s response to the Alliance’s war has been outstanding. So outstanding that at present it holds the upper hand, since the Alliance lost more (its bases and air defenses in the region, as well as escalation dominance) and is suffering more (the global economic collapse and the anger and resentment against the US and Israel this is causing around the world) than Iran is. If in this situation Iran were to agree to move first, if would squander its moral right and practical advantage, as it would place the US in the position of control again.
And in this way, Iran, China and Russia would lose everything they achieved over the past three months.