"Iran's Mystery Gift To Trump"
by Larry C. Johnson
"I think the picture sums it up… Iran is not going to negotiate with the Trump administration on Trump’s terms. Iran has set its terms and will not deviate from those. Here is a synthesis of the key demands from recent Iranian statements and reporting:
Complete halt to aggression and assassinations: Iran demands an immediate and total end to US and Israeli attacks, strikes, and targeted killings against Iranian territory, officials, nuclear sites, and allied “resistance” forces (e.g., Hezbollah in Lebanon, groups in Iraq, and others across the region). This includes a ceasefire that extends to all fronts, not just a temporary pause.
Guarantees and mechanisms to prevent future attacks/war: Concrete, verifiable international or legal safeguards that the war will not be “reimposed” on Iran. This could include binding agreements or frameworks ensuring no resumption of hostilities.
War reparations and compensation for damages: Payment (or “guaranteed and clearly defined” financial compensation) for destruction caused by the strikes, including infrastructure, civilian areas, and economic losses. Some reports tie this to broader sanctions relief or economic concessions.
Recognition of Iranian sovereignty and control over the Strait of Hormuz: A new regulatory or legal framework affirming Iran’s authority over this critical chokepoint for global oil shipping. This has been interpreted as seeking economic leverage (e.g., potential passage fees or control), rather than unrestricted international access. Iran has used threats/partial closures of the strait as leverage during the conflict.
Broader regional elements: A ceasefire between Israel and Hezbollah (and potentially other proxies). In some lists: Closure or dismantling of US military bases in the region. Continued development of Iran’s ballistic missile program without external limitations. An end to the conflict “across all fronts” for all involved resistance groups. Additional elements mentioned in some Iranian or mediated contexts include recognition of Iran’s “legitimate” nuclear rights (peaceful enrichment) and rejection of any forced dismantlement of its nuclear program.
There you have it. Trump has been successful this week in bamboozling the oil and stock markets into believing that an end of the war is at hand and that Iran will accept defeat. If Trump decides to launch a ground attack on Iran this weekend or early next week, that will finally awaken the deluded Western market makers that the war, rather than wrapping up, will amp up.
In my last article I laid out one scenario - i.e., a simultaneous attack on Kharg and Qeshm islands - that I think is most likely because it is supposed to open the Strait of Hormuz. If that is the target of the ground operation, it will fail to achieve the goal of lifting Iran’s blockade of the Strait.
There are a couple of other scenarios that some pundits believe are more likely: capturing Chabahar port or capturing Iran’s enriched uranium. I think these are unlikely, but I’m not the one calling the shots and cannot rule them out. Capturing Chabahar achieves nothing strategic, and certainly does not open the Strait of Hormuz. In my judgment, the US does not have enough troops to secure that port and prevent Iran from retaking it.
What about the other scenario - i.e., capturing a site where Iran’s enriched uranium is stored? This is unlikely because I believe those sites are located in the interior of Iran and the US helicopters that would deliver the troops to the site would not have enough fuel to fly back to the place from where they launched. The US would have to covertly insert massive fuel bladders at some remote location that would be used to refuel the air assets used on such a mission. To do that would require flying a number of C-130s into Iran. Those are relatively slow-flying aircraft and would likely be shot down before reaching their destination. I am not saying it cannot be done, but it is a highly risky venture and is more likely to fail. I continue to hope that I am wrong. We’ll know better come Monday morning."
No comments:
Post a Comment