Recent Items

Iran War: Brief Update – JD Vance Acting in Bad Faith, Israel Stressed Even as It Doubles Down on Intent to Stay in Lebanon

Posted on by

[Today’s Iran war post is yet again launching before complete because Greenspan. Please come back at 8:00 AM EDT for a final version]

Even though Iran war news has understandably slowed down a lot in the absence of much in the way of new developments, it still makes sense to provide some information hygiene items to compensate for less-than-great mainstream media reporting and framing.

JD Vance Reveals Himself as a Problem, Not a Solution

JD Vance gave a number of statements to the media on what he depicted as things Iran had or expected to agree to, which Iran denied or was certain to reject. This conduct confirms Iran’s view that US officials and even more so those of the Trump Administration are utterly untrustworthy.

Vance claimed Iran had agreed to let IAEA inspectors back in. This came after Iran (I think the deputy foreign minister, if I find a clip I will add it) had said in his statement about the Switzerland negotiation session that the only discussion of nuclear issues was each side briefly stating its posiiton. No concessions or commitments were made.

To BBC’s credit, it gave prominent play to Iran object to Vance’s claims. From US eases oil sanctions as Iran denies Vance claim on nuclear inspectors:

Iran has denied a claim by Vice-President JD Vance that it will allow nuclear inspectors back into the country, after the first round of talks between Washington and Tehran to reach a final deal to end the war.

Following negotiations in Switzerland, Vance said discussions with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) could be happening “as soon as today”.

But Iran’s foreign ministry told state media that Tehran had made “no new commitments” on nuclear inspections.

It came as the US temporarily waived sanctions, allowing Iran to sell oil in US dollars for the first time in decades.

We had noted yesterday that Iran had said the oil sanctions had been lifted when no action had yet been taken by OFAC. That has now happened via a 60 day waiver.

Another Vance fabrication:

The full text of the tweet:

Reporter: You mentioned Iranian frozen funds could be used to buy American soy. Have the Iranians have already agreed to that?

Vance: Yeah, that was something that came up yesterday. And we actually asked the qataris to help us set up the mechanism so that we could ensure that the money goes where we want it to go. And they agreed to do that. We have a good relationship, obviously, with them and a good operational oversight mechanism in place. But even with that said, even with the caveat that it’s going to benefit American farmers and obviously benefit the people of Iran, we want both. But fundamentally, that money is not going to be unfrozen unless we continue to see progress. And that will obviously be a big part of the negotiation in the days to come.

There is no way Iran would agree to anything like this in general, much the less at this stage of the talks. See for instance:

Again, the full text for your convenience:

Iran imports ± 10 million tonnes of corn a year and ± 0 from the United States, by design.

A deal that ring-fences Tehran’s own unfrozen money to US grain is not relief, it is a leash, and Iran is spending billions on overseas farms precisely to avoid putting its head through it.

Prediction: the agricultural-escrow clause does not survive the final text because JD Vance has no idea what he is talking about here.

For a longer-form takedown of Vance’s embarrassing performance:

Robert Pape, in some fresh talks (this one is more compact than others), revisits a point he made earlier, that the Trump Administration conceives of the Iran negotiations as business bargaining while Iran sees them as a vehicle to further increase its power. Pape is too proper to stick the knife in, but Team Trump is bingo when Iran is playing chess.

Uh, oh, the Trump wrecking ball has come out yet again, here in a tweet after the first release of this post:

If this is not merely an exercise in Trump acting like the Big Man, you can kiss this deal goodbye.

Israel Getting Stressed as It Tries to Hang Tough on Lebanon

This news hit my feeds just as I was readying the first publication of this post. Israel of course has violated the ceasefire, perhaps not coincidentally not long after the technical negotiators left Switzerland:

This is not even remotely to defend Israel or the IDF; they chose to invade Lebanon and engage in brutal ethnic cleansing. But it appears that even the weak-seeming US deconfliction process on top of the ceasefire put the IDF in freakout mode at having its ability to engage in rank abuses curtailed. Even though one could assume ceasefire violation as always were baked in, the upset at some US curbs increasing the odds of speedy and nasty violations. From Shaiel Ben-Ephraim:

Due to the negotiations in Switzerland and pressure from Trump, the IDF has been put in a defensive formation in Lebanon. This has alarmed their command structure and soldiers who feel like sitting ducks in the territory. The NYT put out a couple of stories on this and Ynet followed up with comments from soldiers on the ground:

1) On Saturday Israeli commanders got new orders restricting them to defensive action. Troops can fire only against an immediate threat. Anything proactive needs the Chief of Staff. No warning shots at civilians returning south unless they get too close to positions. No blowing up homes or infrastructure in the security zone without senior approval.

2) Israel denied this. Netanyahu said on Monday: fighters have “full operational freedom to thwart any direct or emergent threat.” He did not address the ban on offensive action. It is clear that he lied.

3) Why the contradiction? Israel is embarrased that the US is forcing them into restraint.

4) There is more attention on Lebanon now as Pakistan and Qatar announced a “de-confliction cell” with Iran, the US, and Lebanon to police the end of operations.

5) Troops on the ground are very unhappy. A reservist in Division 98 said: “We feel we aren’t doing something meaningful.” He says they secure the sector more than they operate. They net positions only so drones can’t get in.

6) There is no defense against drones and the lack of action now makes the problem worse. Same reservist : “We have soccer nets and banana-grove nets, that’s our protection.” He says Hezbollah does not waste drones on netted positions. They hunt exposed soldiers. His sector near the sea takes the most: “Of all the rotations I’ve had, this is the one I’m most afraid of.” He describes diving off a Humvee into a ditch, praying a drone misses him. “The most helpless I’ve ever been.”

The directives are real and restrictive. Three senior officials spent the weekend denying or recasting them. The restraint is externally driven by US-Iran diplomacy and now backstopped by a de-confliction cell. IDF soldiers are dying in large numbers and they feel like they are being treated as expendable without any clear strategy in Lebanon.

And:

Strait of Hormuz Traffic Uncertain

The press and quite a few Twitterati are keen to hype the idea that more traffic is moving through the Strait of Hormuz. But as far as I can tell, the consequential traffic, as in of tankers, is still nearly all Iranian or Chinese, as in China bound. That will help keep China help alleviate the oil crunch by not adding to oil demand but does not provide much direct relief to other nations.

Mind you, this picture could change a lot in mere days, but enthusiasm appears to exceed consequential vessel movements.

And remember, what the world economy needs is regular two way traffic, as in ships going into the Gulf to pick up fresh cargoes and then proceed to their destinations. Perhaps I have missed it, but ex Iranian and Chinese ships, there does not seem to be much of that.

From Lloyd’s List in VLCC rates spike yet again as ‘confusion continues to reign’ at Strait of Hormuz:

  • Baltic Exchange’s West Africa-China VLCC index rose to $188,957 per day on Monday, up 92% week on week to the highest level since March 10
  • US Gulf-China VLCC index increased to $154,987 per day, up 46% week on week to the highest assessment since April 2
  • Oman-China VLCC index rose to Worldscale 276, up 82% week on week to the highest level since the index was introduced on March 24

The Strait of Hormuz isn’t open yet, but the chance that it might be soon — even if it’s a partial reopening — is a magnet for VLCC tonnage, pumping up spot rates at other loading ports around the globe

SPOT rates for very large crude carriers have surged, even as the crude flow through the Strait of Hormuz remains a relative trickle compared to pre-crisis levels.

Notice “relative trickle.” Similarly, even though the numbers are up, they are still depressed compared to the old normal:

Admittedly some other meaningful-size ships are starting to move:

Iran continues down the path of regularizing its control:

Even more important, Iran (despite ferocious US muscling of Oman) also seems to be making process in getting Oman formally involved in management of the Strait of Hormuz, which is critical to having Persian Gulf Authority be colorably legal, as opposed to an exercise in pure power. From Iran International:

Iranian Parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagher Qalibaf said in Oman that new arrangements have been agreed for the Strait of Hormuz, including a coordination mechanism, hotline and contact centre to address any ambiguity or disputes. He said the parties would maintain close coordination over a 30-day period, under Article 5 of the arrangements governing navigation and coordination in the Strait of Hormuz, referring to a specific clause within the operational framework for managing maritime passage, to ensure safer and more efficient transit of vessels through the strategic waterway.

And let us not forget that The Resistance has pressure points in addition to the Strait of Hormuz it can use to induce the US to come down hard on Israel:

Done for today! Likely to see you tomorrow.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Subscribe to Post Comments
97 comments

  1. The Rev Kev

    It’s hard to account for JD Vance’s blatherings and making up concessions that the Iranians never made such as Iran letting the IAEA inspectors back in or agreeing to spend all their released funds on American soy (since China isn’t buying it anymore). This is the sort of stuff that Trump says. So could it be that Vance is operating on a very short leash and Trump is giving him detailed instructions on what to say, things that Trump himself would say?

    Reply ↓
    1. ocop

      It is a bizarre spectacle. Could also be Vance getting soundbites onto the news to assuage Trump while the “real” negotiations continue.

      Funnily enough, if you reread the “soy for dollars” discussion, Vance never actually addresses the question or makes a definitive claim about Iran. “They” (the Qataris) agreed to “that” (a sham transfer mechanism). The money only to be unfrozen after unspecified “progress” (but not explicit agricultural purposes). He is a slimy lawyer after all.

      Reply ↓
      1. ChrisFromGA

        I wonder also if the constant lying is due in part to the press being so timid and weak about doing their job as a watchdog.

        Trump went nuclear over a rare NY Times piece critical of his conduct in the war. He threatened to sue them for “treason” which shows his stupidity as treason is a criminal, not a civil offense. The overreaction suggests that his skin is so thin he can’t stand any sort of reality check.

        If more “journalists” found a spine then the lies might have to stop.

        Reply ↓
        1. amfortas

          aging narcissists with creeping(and sometimes galloping) dementia are just like that.
          skin gets thinner and thinner…and the criteria for tolerance of even minor challenges changes seemingly at random.
          i deal with it every day.

          Reply ↓
        2. nature boy

          Let them spin all they want. As Mary Poppins said, “A spoonful of sugar helps the medicine go down, the medicine go dow-wown, medicine go down.”

          Reply ↓
        3. Lefty Godot

          Constant lying is one of the symptoms of psychopathy. But the nonexistent Fourth Estate is just lapping all those lies right up, and not asking any serious questions (how many casualties has the US suffered in this war so far? where’s the “rescued pilot” that supposedly got air-lifted out of Iran? etc.). After all the years we made fun of Tass and Pravda, now we’re worse than they ever were.

          Reply ↓
        4. motorslug

          We all know that the WH press corps are basically hand-picked cronies after trump drained the pool. Was Vance not actually in Switzerland when these statements were made and did he have imbedded stooges with him?
          You would think an international press pool would be a bit more demanding than US mannequin heads.

          Reply ↓
        5. Lee

          IIRC, I recently heard Mearsheimer put forth the notion that in governmental systems with electoral processes where officials are at least to some degree answerable to an electorate that the incentives for leaders to lie is greater than in systems lacking those processes so that leaders can more safely ignore the will of the general population— an interesting proposition that gives one pause to ponder.

          Reply ↓
      2. XXYY

        Vance sounds like he was raised by a really mean Dad who expressed zero love for his kid and instead used his dad power to enforce his preferred behavioral norms on young JD. As I listen to him talk about “expectations” for Iran I can somehow visualize this cruel and loveless interplay very clearly.

        Parents have a ton of power to shape the future evolution of human society. Hopefully the parents among us will work hard to use this for good.

        Reply ↓
        1. Oregon Lawhobbit

          On the other hand, I teach rooms full of young’uns who were clearly brought up with zero expectations and it shows in their decidedly antisocial behaviors. Maybe parents having expectations – at least in regard to manners and decorum – is not a bad thing.

          I’m curious as to how much of Vance’s antics (Vantics?) are him being a loyal follower and toeing the Trumpline regardless of personal beliefs, and how much of it actual Vance. If the rumors are correct and he’s pretty much tapped out on further political ambitions, then we’ll just have to wait for the tell-all book that comes out.

          Reply ↓
          1. Hickory

            It’s critical to have high expectations of each other, and for each of us to have strong and respectful boundaries based on the golden rule.

            Abusive parents have double standards, demanding courtesy while being disrespectful to their kids. Weak parents have no standards or expectations at all. Neither of these help children learn to have strong boundaries that are respectful of themselves and others.

            These are common problems in unfree societies, where a few people rule and the rest obey. We don’t choose our laws and we’re not allowed to enforce the laws we’re given by the government. In other words, we are not expected to set appropriate boundaries that work for the whole society – we only are trained to obey the boundaries set for us, and for the vast majority of us this is true from childhood through adulthood.

            In healthy nations in traditional times (free societies, aka native/indigenous nations in traditional times) it was/is common for people to have very strong boundaries and high expectations for each other based on the golden rule. People have strong dignity. I have found hundreds of stories showing this to be true in healthy nations around the world when they can live in a traditional way.

            But when people are conquered and can’t free themselves, and eventually forget what freedom and deep solidarity is even like, this has many tragic results, and one common result is poor parenting and poor boundary-setting. Many people in unfree societies have low dignity and self-worth and deep insecurity which shows up in all kinds of ways – voting in elections when they know the politicians will keep being corrupt, joining the police or military and obeying orders of leaders they know are corrupt, working at meaningless jobs just to survive, pretending to respect petty bosses at work, tolerating superficial or unsatisfying relationships, pretending to believe state propaganda to avoid losing friendships or jobs, believing hurtful and disturbing religious propaganda… the list goes on.

            And yes, this widespread insecurity and low self-respect also shows up in families and child-rearing, and tragically often gets passed from one generation to the next in disturbing ways. To create societies without these widespread problems, we need to learn what free societies are like where people live in deep solidarity with each other. Where people build up each other’s self-worth and self-respect so everyone has the strength to confront injustice, so that justice will be normal. I have found countless stories from healthy nations in traditional times showing what this way of life is like. For those interested, I share the stories in a free book here.

            Reply ↓
            1. debug

              Thank you Hickory,

              I appreciate your sentiments and your comment in general, but in my opinion your book isn’t free. It’s behind an email-required ‘paywall.’ If you really wanted to share your book for free, you would let me read it and then let me decide if I wanted to share my email with you. After I read it, I might even make a donation. You could even supply a truly free link to a downloadable pdf of the TOC and first chapter like some other authors do. I’m interested, but not for the price of my email address.

              There is also a policy at NC about posting links to your own site: “Other violations include but are not limited to:…link-whoring/using comments to promote your work….” (See the “Policies” menu choice at the top of the site.) Given the advertised content of your book and the generally positive and thoughtful comments you have left here (in my opinion), I can understand why the hammer has not been applied. It’s not my decision, and I’m not asking anyone to do anything, I’m just trying to be thoughtful and respectful of the site in mentioning this to you.

              In your own words, it’s critical to have high expectations of each other.

              Reply ↓
            2. Yves Smith Post author

              I missed this promotion of your book. I keep throwing out comments where you try that. Do it again and you will be blacklisted.

              I also mangled the link you provided since linking from NC boosts the destination in the algos.

              Reply ↓
        2. ChrisPacific

          I’ve read his book. His parents separated when he was very young and he was ‘raised’ by his mother, who had a drug problem and a series of problematic romantic relationships, leading to an endless stream of ‘new dads’ (in practical terms it seems like his older sister and grandmother did most of the work, and he did a fair amount of ‘parenting’ his mother himself).

          He was invited to join his father’s household in Ohio at some point, late childhood or early teens I think. It sounded OK although very religious (he briefly adopted it himself, it sounds like his relationship with religion began there). Due to his upbringing, he never felt secure there, and vividly describes being on your best behaviour all the time and wondering when the conditions will kick in or the catch will arrive.

          He left that household at some point and moved back to West Virginia, I forget why (I think his mother or some other family needed him, or he missed them or something). Not long after that his mother died, I believe, and he was raised the rest of the way to adulthood by his grandmother, who he credits with saving him from following in his mother’s path.

          He is self-aware about this in the book, and looks at statistics around how often the people whose lives go off the rails come from disrupted homes like he did. This was all the pre-Trump Vance, before he earned his pass into the establishment via Yale (it’s beginning to happen by the end of the book). The Vance of today, having flipped position on Trump and absorbed/been absorbed into MAGA, bears little resemblance to the author of the book.

          Reply ↓
    2. ChrisFromGA

      That’s my interpretation as well, plus “a fish rots from the head down.”

      This whole administration is rotten to the core.

      Reply ↓
    3. jefemt

      Reading the summary of the Vance mis-statements, or the carefully worded statements that can be taken in multiple ways, my take is-
      -Vance trained as a flack for the military
      -Vance graduated Yale law
      -Vance has been groomed at the knee of the world’s most mendacious politician of the modern era.

      Distressing to think he is in the running to step right into Trump’s shoes during the remainder of Trump’s term, and/ or to run to take the spot if we have elections.

      Really, the totality of global events and conditions is quite a bit if not too much to ponder much less swallow.

      Reply ↓
    4. Verifyfirst

      Seems unremarkable to me that Vance is emulating Trump’s style–after all, it has seemed to work for Trump for a very long time.

      Both of them are always ad-libbing, they have never prepared, they have no particular knowledge of events or the Middle East, they likely could not name each country there in its correct location, including Israel.

      Like the Borscht Belt comedian who senses they are losing their audience, these two just keep going with a never-ending patter, hoping something will stick.

      I don’t think Vance can be fired–instead of trying to be loyal and participating in the charade, he might do better in the long term being honest, saying the war should never have happened, Trump is an idiot, we got our butts kicked and now we have to do what Iran wants. Lol.

      Reply ↓
      1. Laughingsong

        “I don’t think Vance can be fired”

        But something like some kind of scandal could be kicked up to make him resign, à la Agnew.

        Reply ↓
    5. danpaco

      My feeling is this is all performance to try and push this MOU to fruition.
      It may be worth compiling a list of Iranian gains on the political front in the last week;
      -US blockade lifted
      -Iranian sanctions waiver implemented
      -Ceasefire in Lebanon
      Certainly a lot more to do. On the wide angle view, a radical difference.

      Reply ↓
    6. Samuel Conner

      Without meaning to defend the conduct of Administration principals, it’s possible to see the mendacity and slippery language as an intelligent attempt to manage perceptions among powerful US opponents of the “deal” (or, if not them, at least the perceptions of the wider populace that credulously pays attention to MSM reporting) while making the concrete capitulatory moves that are objectively necessary to avoid economic collapse.

      So, for example, there is the objective granting of the 60-day waiver on sanctions, but also the language suggesting that Iran has made concessions that it will objectively never make.

      Likewise the evidence (presented toward the end of the post) that IDF operations do seem to be coming under increasing constraint. This is a concrete move in the direction of Iran’s demands re: Lebanon. Pair that with DJT’s post about the necessity of Iran reining in Hezbollah.

      Perhaps this is all (or at least in part) intelligent misdirection in the context of severe political constraint (though in DJT’s case, I think that Robert Barnes’ framing of “confession through projection” is highly plausible).

      Reply ↓
      1. Offtrail

        The misdirection is not very intelligent if all the Google News headlines about the negotiations feature the discrepancies between US and Iranian statements.

        Reply ↓
      2. jrkrideau

        Without meaning to defend the conduct of Administration principals, it’s possible to see the mendacity and slippery language as an intelligent attempt to manage perceptions among powerful US opponents of the “deal”

        Possibly true but rather shortsighted on the international stage. It simply confirms Yves’ assertion that the USA is seen as totally untrustworthy.

        Any US attempt to negotiate with other countries starts with the other country having to assume that the USA’s word is worthless.

        Reply ↓
    7. ilsm

      As with Sec War Hegseth, I would rather the SNL cold open character playing Vance be the real VP.

      That said it is very quiet around Iran today!

      Reply ↓
    8. leaf

      Rubio really is a clever guy, somehow staying out of this debacle and letting Vance take all the blame. Wonder if Vance knows he is being made into the fall guy…

      Reply ↓
      1. Yves Smith Post author

        Vance was the one who was advocating to end the war. So I hate to say it but the normal practice in big organizations is to give the guy who is keenest about a project the job of carrying it out. Otherwise, you get “Not invented here” and footdragging and/or sabotage.

        Reply ↓
      2. lyman alpha blob

        He should know since Trump explicitly said that if it works out, he will take the credit and if it doesn’t he’ll be blaming JD. Of course the compromised AP feels the need to label this as a “joke”.

        Reply ↓
    9. Victor Sciamarelli

      It is a big mistake, IMHO, to focus too much critisism on the MoU because it gives the war hawks an issue. The war was/is a strategic blunder, a disaster we need to extricate ourselves from. The war hawks, instead, now want to focus on the MoU as a blunder, even a capitulation, while they assert the war was and remains winnable.
      More importantly, and obvious to everyone, is the US entered the war without any allies except Israel; a dead weight; hardly a good partner in a return to war. Still, for the war hawks continuing to war makes sense. They want people to think it’s the MoU that will harm the US rather than, the obvious, which is the war caused us harm and more war will do even more harm.

      Reply ↓
    10. Who Cares

      It is a fairly simple trick. if the Iranians don’t push back hard on any of the insinuated concessions then the US gets to club them around the ears later with it stating that Iran publicly agreed with what the US said.
      And to the people that run the negotiations for the US it costs nothing since the western press will at most state that Iran stated it isn’t true without any follow up. The real cost being that it will further entrench Iranian hardliners and their demands is irrelevant to these nincompoops since weakening those is hard work compared to trying to get in a few cheap shots.

      Reply ↓
    11. Mike from Jersey

      I understand that Vance is probably engaging in this nonsense as a front man for Trump.

      But I am far too jaded for that. The political class in the United States is jam packed with idiots like Trump – including both Republicans and Democrats.

      Vance is smart enough to realize that the stupidity has to stop. American foreign policy must return to the world of grown ups.

      If Vance cares more about his career than he cares about America then I have no use for him.

      Reply ↓
  2. Yves Smith Post author

    All done! If you arrived early, please refresh this page, since it has important updates, such as Israel violating the ceasefire in Lebanon.

    Reply ↓
  3. The Rev Kev

    If there is anything that Trump said that will kill any deal being made, it is this bit from his Truth Social post that can be seen halfway down this post-

    ‘The Money and/or Sanctions that the U.S. Treasury is releasing goes into escrow, controlled by the U.S.A., and will be used for the purchase of food and medical supplies, exclusively from the United States, including Corn, Wheat, and Soybeans from our great American Farmers. These are things that are desperately needed by Iran. This is a humanitarian crisis, and I feel it is necessary to help, NOW, before it is too late.’

    That is the same mechanism that is being done to Iraq and now Venezuela. Trump will determine what Iran will be allowed to buy and at what prices. And with each tranche, more and more strings will be attached like has been done in Iraq. They are talking about soy here but perhaps Iran has no use for soy and maybe wants civilian machinery & parts instead. What then? Another factor is that Trump & Co do not want Iran to get any hard currency as they would be more inclined to buy goods from Russia or China or the UAE instead. For example, why buy medical supplies from the US when they can get it much cheaper from China. It would be one thing if an agreement was made for Iran to use that money to buy crops and goods from the US but here Trump wants total control of what Iran can and can’t buy in the US itself. It’s like the country of Iran will be on an allowance – with their own money. Nope. This is a deal killer for sure.

    Reply ↓
    1. Samuel Conner

      Perhaps it’s a transient political sop thrown to congressional delegations from Farm Belt states. It’s unlikely to be implemented in a final agreement, but for the time being it can help to suppress criticism from a part of the GOP “coalition”.

      It was reported previously that Iranian negotiators were being told behind the scenes to pay attention not to what DJT was saying and texting, but to concrete actions US was actually taking. That might be prudent counsel for us, who have much less access to what is happening behind the scenes. Watch for fulfillment (or non-fulfillment) of the MoU terms. It may be that everything else is sound and fury of little significance.

      Reply ↓
    2. Steve H.

      Think of the number of decision attractors:
      : Bibi kompromat on Trump
      : Non-Bibi controlled kompromat on Trump
      : Trump’s metric of timing the market algorithms with headlines to generate insider opportunities
      : Political professionals who don’t have Trump’s election discounting
      : European distractions (Seems like a European problem to me.)
      : Nukes
      : Demand destruction
      And more, a multi-body instability that can keep Western strategic orientation strabismic. All while Iran holds the fundamental.

      “Depressions are how we harvest the wealth accumulated by the lower classes.”

      Reply ↓
      1. Yves Smith Post author

        Sorry on your last point, the rich lose far more money in crises. After the 2008 meltdown, wealth inequality dropped a lot.

        But poorer people are much less able to take the hit.

        Reply ↓
        1. motorslug

          Knowing that many evil ones will fall much farther than my strata, and be more traumatized by it, is a silver lining in dark cloud times. Would love to see Musk on food stamps.
          Textbook Schadenfreude!

          Reply ↓
  4. 1965

    QUOTE:
    “the Trump Administration conceives of the Iran negotiations as business bargaining while Iran sees them as a vehicle to further increase its power”

    This is an incomplete and misleading interpretation of present reality.

    It is true the Trump regime engages in transactional bargaining and constantly seeks to maximize American (or Trump family retainer) revenues. America employs its power to exert global control to the maximum possible extent and American leaders are insulted when any entity (China, Russia, Iran, Cuba, EU) fails to accept its role as supplicant.

    It is also true that Israel has power. Israel has suborned the entirety of the US democratic process, and manages both American and global public opinion to an historically unprecedented degree. Having achieved this control Israel proceeds to engage in genocide, ethnic cleansing, and military lebensraum unrebuked by Western polities. Speak out on these issues and you will be Charlie Kirked or labelled an anti-Semite and subject to criminal prosecution.

    Iran has achieved its power after enduring the American/Anglo destruction of its democracy, American imposition of a brutal and inhumane autocracy, an American engineered war with Iran, crippling American economic sanctions, and constant American/Israeli public vilification.

    Iran has devoted 47 years to creating conditions which permit it to defy American transactionalism and Israeli perfidy. Some commentators describe Iran emerging as the 4th world power; I think they may be correct.

    But Iran uses its power to defend the Palestinians against dispossession and genocide and to defend the Lebanese from Israeli depredations and military murder. Beyond these two initiatives I see no evidence of Iran having any interests other than to be allowed to live in peace. There is no evidence of Iran seeking to occupy Greenland, destroy Russian pipelines or spend billions of tax dollars on bio-warfare weapons.

    I believe the world will come to deeply appreciate and respect the Iranian use of power. At the very least Iran is proving Fukuyama wrong. Iran is acting to save humanity from an imposed American/Israeli gulag: “That is, the end-point of mankind’s ideological evolution and the universalization of Western liberal democracy as the final form of human government.”

    Reply ↓
    1. JonnyJames

      I agree with your views regarding Iran. However, I would say that Israel is an imperialist project of the West, and the atrocities began during British Mandate Palestine. Then in 1948, the ethnic cleansing and the Nakba really increased, many years before Israel “achieved control”.

      The UK and US overthrew the Mossadegh govt in Iran in 1953,, way before Israel “controlled” US policy.

      Israel’s actions are “unrebuked” by the West (US and vassals) because the policies are funded and supported by the west and have been since day one. The US oligarchy also fully support Israel policy. The convergence of interests: BigOil, MICIMATT (MIC), BigTech, BigFinance all benefit from US foreign policy. This is much more than just Israel and the Zios “control” everything. This does not explain US foreign policy and the attempt of the US to maintain global primacy, including USD financial hegemony. I have not seen any significant resistance to US foreign policy from any US oligarch or the oligarchy as a whole. So it is not just Israel, they are part of the larger picture. Ray McGovern, for example, considers Israel as part of the US MICIMATT and their interests converge heavily.

      The European imperial powers, and the US have committed plenty of atrocities and crimes without Israel. The hypocrites in the west can hide behind Israel and feign outrage while they fund and arm them. It’s all a cheap act that has become obvious. But since Fukuyama’s End of History has been relegated to laughing stock material and US primacy is waning quickly, it is only a matter of time before the settler-colonial project of Israel comes to an end, like the Crusader States. Time is on Iran’s side, not on the side of the empire.

      Reply ↓
      1. Lefty Godot

        The Mossadegh overthrow involved some ad libbing by Kim Roosevelt, an Arabist who didn’t have much use for Israel. So I agree it’s misleading to think any one plan is behind all the events (like tracing everything back to Cecil Rhodes or one of the Rothschild clan). But clearly Israel has been taking over more and more control of US policy since the assassination of Rabin and Netanyahu’s defeat of Peres afterwards. It’s hard to describe the current realities in terms of nation states (Israel, the US, the UK, etc.) when the ruling classes have overlapped each other so much that they constitute a supra-national elite that uses countries to their advantage in accordance with their own economic, ethnic and religious preferences. The nominal “democracy” of the US has become a pale shadow of an influence on how the might of the US government (such as it is, i.e., mainly the thus far unlimited money printing press) is deployed in the world, and the big media make palatable the lies of the ruling supra-national elite rather than serving the genuine national interests of countries like the US and the UK. It happens a lot of that elite reside in the US (for now) thanks to that dollar printing press, but they are accelerating away from the home country metaphorically, in that their interests and ours coincide less and less as time goes on, and that acceleration has been dramatically evident in this 21st century.

        Reply ↓
        1. JonnyJames

          I think you meant Kermit Roosevelt.

          When we speak of “national interest”: it is not the interests of the majority of the population, but the interests of the oligarchy that determine policy. Israel serves the interests of the US oligarchy. Since political bribery has been formalized in the US (Citizens United case etc.), we can see AIPAC and the Lobby as one aspect of the institutional corruption. Congress is also bribed by MICIMATT, BigOil, BigTech etc. it’s “legal”.

          I see Israel policy as a symptom, not a cause. Blaming Israel let’s the non-Jewish, so-called Christian elites off the hook, but they are clearly just as complicit, and even more. If Israel disappeared today, the US would not stop in trying to eliminate any challenges to “US primacy”
          Some have observed that US policy is aimed at China, and we see the war on Russia going on, still supported by the US.

          As Michael Hudson has pointed out for some time: “The US is willing to fight until the last Ukrainian, and the last Israeli”. Would you rather be in Israel or Ukraine, or be in “Splendid Isolation” thousands of miles away in the imperial homeland?

          Reply ↓
    2. Yves Smith Post author

      No, Robert Pape disagrees with you and it appears you have not bothered even listening to or reading his theories. He has a long form explanation of why supporting Hezbollah is very very very much about power projection. He does not much buy the noble actor thesis. And Iran indeed is not doing anything re Gaza. where the cost of action is high and the power upside limited.

      Reply ↓
      1. 1965

        Mr Pape may disagree with me but I agree with his theoretic assessment of the present conflict. Where I may disagree with him is the focus on raw power and omitting the issue of how that power is used. I have not heard him address this perspective.

        As for Iran not doing anything re Gaza the leader of Hamas may disagree:

        The leader of Hamas, Ismail Haniyeh, acknowledged in an interview last year that his group received $70 million in military assistance from Iran. According to a State Department report from 2020, Iran provides about $100 million annually to Palestinian terrorist groups, including Hamas, Palestinian Islamic Jihad, and the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine-General Command.
        SOURCE:
        https://web.archive.org/web/20231012234730/https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/2023/10/09/iran-support-hamas-training-weapons-israel/

        As can be seen the US State Department asserts a higher degree of support and , according to Reuters, Israeli security sources claim an even higher figure:
        An Israeli security source said that Iran had significantly increased funding for Hamas’ military wing in the past year from $100 million to about $350 million a year.
        SOURCE:
        https://web.archive.org/web/20231013214141/https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/how-hamas-secretly-built-mini-army-fight-israel-2023-10-13/

        My view on the “Noble Actor” theory is that in armed conflict it is the victor who writes history. It may take decades to unravel the lies we choose to believe in.

        All I can be certain of is that today multiple religions peacefully co-exist in present day Iran including a Jewish population protected by the constitution with a reserved seat in the legislature for a representative of the Jewish faith. On the night of April 6th the IDF bombed the Jewish synagogue in Tehran.
        SOURCE:
        https://www.theguardian.com/world/2026/apr/22/tehran-embattled-jewish-community-israeli-bombing-synagogue

        It is my understanding that at one time the lands of Palestine exhibited a similar degree of peaceful cohabitation between numerous religions. The present circumstance in the region can hardly be described as a form of progress. Seeking the extermination of the “other” is an act that is never forgotten.

        In closing I wish to join other members of NC in thanking you for your hard work and for permitting a dialog on these issues. Pape himself has recently commented on the important positive effects of independent media. I agree with him.

        Reply ↓
        1. Yves Smith Post author

          Pape has explicitly addressed how he sees Hezbollah fitting in Iran’s power equation and he has dissed, in asides, the idea that altruism is their main motivation.

          And you are straw manning me. I said Gaza, as in the genocide, not Hamas. Iran was very pissed off at Hamas launching 10/7, since they were not consulted and the attackupset Iran’s very long game v. Israel. Iran included Lebanon but not Gaza in its MOU. Yet in the MOU, Iran agreed to have its allies stop all attacks, but I see no evidence that it is making a stink about continued destruction in Gaza nor (correspondingly) acting as if it would press Hamas to stand down if Israel miraculously were to stop its genocide.

          Reply ↓
        3. JonnyJames

          You cite State Dept. and Israeli sources regarding Iran as if they are credible? Sorry, you lost me right there. Palestinian “terror” groups? I might as well watch CNN or Fox. I won’t bother reading your posts in future

          Reply ↓
    1. TonyJ

      A forty point form , Windall, not forty page. The range of information and level of detail they are asking for is quite something. No wonder the Iranians are giving themselves 48 hours to confirm the data.

      Reply ↓
  6. Sunlight Disinfects

    Perhaps USA/Trump intends to use the made-up provisions as a bargaining chip?

    Trump needs something to trade because Israel is adamant about remaining in Lebanon.

    PS I read that the idea for restricting use of the frozen funds came from Jared Kuchner.

    Reply ↓
    1. Samuel Conner

      I can imagine that this creative imagineering is for the purpose of promoting perceptions in US that USG has more bargaining leverage than it actually has. This could plausibly and at least for a while have the effect of quieting opponents of the “deal” who accurately perceive it to be substantially an instrument of US surrender.

      To get a sense of what is actually happening, I think we should focus on actual moves in compliance with the terms of the MoU more than the flurry of proposals for or claims about additional and/or future concessions that are not present in the MoU terms.

      (To adopt your framing, perhaps these are bargaining chips — for the purpose of bargaining not with the Iranians, but rather with domestic opponents of the “deal”)

      Reply ↓
      1. Sunlight Disinfects

        I think I saw it on Al Jazeera, but here is confirmation from Farm Policy News which states that:

        … Vance credited Trump’s son-in-law Jared Kushner for the proposal

        Reply ↓
  7. Tom Stone

    I’m, hold a bit surprised by Vance’s overt lying, to me it looks like “Hey, JD, hold this bag. I’ll be back in a minute”.
    Sabotaging any chance Vance has of separating himself from Trump’s policies.
    And Trump does not seem to realize that he has a bad choice (The MOU) and a much worse choice in continuing “Operation AIPAC Fury”.

    Reply ↓
  8. Ann

    0706 PDT

    Netanyahu says Israel must ‘break free from dependence’ after tensions with Trump administration

    https://en.yenisafak.com/world/netanyahu-says-israel-must-break-free-from-dependence-after-tensions-with-trump-administration-3719923

    “Time Is Not on Moscow’s Side”: US Urges Russia to “Make a Deal” and Secure Immediate Ceasefire

    https://united24media.com/war-in-ukraine/time-is-not-on-moscows-side-us-urges-russia-to-make-a-deal-and-secure-immediate-ceasefire-20090

    Morocco, Albania, and Greece join Gaza International Stabilization Force for Phase II peacekeeping

    https://www.jpost.com/middle-east/article-900275

    Reply ↓
    1. Oregon Lawhobbit

      “Time Is Not on Moscow’s Side”: US Urges Russia to “Make a Deal” and Secure Immediate Ceasefire

      https://united24media.com/war-in-ukraine/time-is-not-on-moscows-side-us-urges-russia-to-make-a-deal-and-secure-immediate-ceasefire-20090

      Time – and the West – may not be on Moscow’s side, but pretty much everything else needed to win a war, men, machines, munitions, momentum, etc., sure is.

      Though I can understand an alleged groundswell in Russia regarding “YTF{amilyblog} is this taking so long???”

      Reply ↓
      1. Safety First

        Not exactly. Yes and no.

        So far as I can tell from looking at Russian social media (i.e. mere mortals) and watching a lot of the commentators on state-adjacent venues (e.g. Solov’ev’s channel), it’s not – “why is this taking so long” in general. It’s more of – “why has it taken so long for us to blow X to smithereens”, e.g. the port in Odessa, the Defense Ministry complex in Kiev, the bridges across the Dnieper at places like Zaporozh’e. In other words, “why aren’t we escalating”.

        It’s not war fatigue, it’s anger. And every time there is another massed “Ukrainian” drone strike (planned and guided by the Pentagon and the CIA using Euro-manufactured drones out of Chinese components…), and especially if it leads to some dead 8-year old kid (as in Moscow a couple of days ago), there is more of this “let’s just turn the whole of Ukraine into a parking lot” type of commentary.

        Which, to be sure, is not the only game in town. Russia’s politics, I would argue, are just as complex as any major country’s, and there are clearly very different views on how to conduct the war in various sections of the government. Hell, Solov’ev himself might have potentially gotten to close to the hawks, as apparently he had not been invited to this year’s Saint Petersburg Economic Forum, and has been loudly complaining on his nightly television show about said fact!

        But nevertheless, I stress, so far the public opinion seemingly can live with the conflict’s duration, so long as it’s visible slash obvious that “we’re giving as good as we’re getting”. In fact, some mainstream papers and journalists (e.g. Sasha Kots in “Komsomol’skaya Pravda”) have been taking the general stance of – don’t worry, we’re hitting them, just that the MoD doesn’t like to brag about it nearly as much as the other side…trying to calm people down, in other words.

        Reply ↓
    2. ddt

      Haven’t read Greece has joined any Gaza international force in local Greek press. Now I don’t put it past the current kowtowing government to have done so but something of that nature hasn’t made the press here and the left/opposition would be all over that.

      Reply ↓
    1. ChrisFromGA

      That last link seems to prove that yet again, we were lied to by this rotten administration … I recall Bessent bragging about how India wasn’t buying Russian crude anymore last fall, then he shut up when the Iran war began.

      All these sanctions were just for show, and public consumption (see Aurelien’s great comment below.) The spice was flowing all along.

      Reply ↓
  10. Aurelien

    Vance is playing the old trick of the Politics of Immediate Effect, or as Blair’s evil guru Alastair Campbell called it, “winning the day.” That’s to say, what counts here is how the US media report the talks, and every day they report, straight-faced, comments like these by Vance as though they were true is another day gained, and another day when public acknowledgement of defeat is avoided. After all, who knows what will happen in a week or two weeks? I suspect, though, the US is actually saying something very different in the negotiations themselves, and the plan is to let the truth out in tiny dribbles, so that the US public slowly becomes accustomed to the idea that they have been misled from the start.

    This ultra-short term strategy contrasts, of course, with Iran’s longer term one, which remains what it has always been: to dominate the region and expel the US. They are prepared to wait. In this context, whilst it would be an exaggeration to call Lebanon a discard, it’s clear now that it’s a secondary issue for Tehran. There’s no actual advantage for them in the war between Israel and Hezbollah continuing, and indeed the longer it goes on the more casualties Hezbollah takes and the greater the risk of losing support among the Shia population, not to mention other communities. It’s useful primarily as a way of driving a wedge between Israel and the US, on the basis that, for Hormuz-related reasons, the US will be desperate to resolve the wider issues, and so will have no choice but to pressure Israel over the war in Lebanon. With a bit of luck, they must be thinking, the US will be sufficiently desperate about oil that it will completely ruin, or at least badly damage, its relationship with Israel. The US is thus the meat in the sandwich at the moment.

    Iran isn’t terribly interested in Lebanon as such, but it wants to recover its role as the most influential foreign actor there. For this it needs Hezbollah, but the longer the war with Israel goes on, the more casualties they will take. This is a sacrifice that Tehran is prepared to make in pursuit of its long-term strategy, but only to a point. Their ideal would be a return to the status quo of about 2022: low-level tension which could be used to justify the existence of Hezbollah, and thus a significant level of control over the political system, but no outright war. The trick for Tehran is to play the Lebanon card just enough, but no more, in search of their longer-term goals.

    Reply ↓
    1. JonnyJames

      Iran policy could also be seen as freeing itself from being surrounded by US military bases, surrounded by hostile US vassals, choked by economic warfare (euphemistically known as “sanctions”), having their scientific experts murdered, having their political and spiritual leaders murdered, having schools bombed, civilians killed etc. This seems reasonable, and given Iran’s demonstrated military power, it will likely “dominate” the region (at the expense of Israel and the Gulf regimes) whether the US and vassals like it or not.

      From a PR standpoint and so-called soft power, throughout the global south and even to a significant degree in the west, Iran is seen as the only power (with allies Hezbollah and “Houthis”) actively and effectively fighting Israel, and making an attempt to stop Israel from wantonly mass murdering civilians. This must also enter into the thoughts of Iranian policy makers. I would say, Iran has also scored a major victory in the “soft power” and PR arenas.

      Reply ↓
    2. Yves Smith Post author

      Robert Pape disagrees with you fundamentally. He regards Hezbollah as a key element for Iran establishing its status as the fourth superpower and a regional hegemon. I suggest you listen to him. The other reason the Israel incursion into Lebanon matters is control of that territory allows them to lay claim to important offshore gas fields.

      Iran commentators have also said Lebanon is in the first clause because the cessation of hostilities, including the Israeli withdrawal from Lebanon, is their most important issue.

      Trita Parsi, who has been talking often to the negotiators, says there will be no deal if the US fails to get Israel to comply with the MOU:

      Reply ↓
      1. JonnyJames

        And that’s the 64 million dollar question: Israel says they will not withdraw. So it looks like no deal as many have predicted. Now that Assad is gone in Syria, I agree with Pape that Lebanon is key for Iran and has been for a long time, and now even more than before. It looks like Iran is already on its way to becoming the regional hegemonic power, Israeli nukes notwithstanding

        Reply ↓
      2. jrkrideau

        At a very basic political level, abandoning Lebanon shows everyone that Iran is as untrustworthy as the USA. This would not bode well for any future relations in the region or the rest of the world, for that matter.

        Reply ↓
  11. jdoyle

    I listened to that snippet from JD Vance for the 1st time and I don’t think he’s answering the reporters question, rather he’s just blabbing on about internal negotiation items, like kite-flying this idea about Iranian frozen funds to buy US soy. If pressed on DID IRAN AGREE, I suspect he walks his comment back.

    Lookit, there’s not going to be an agreed solution here in this war of choice, the neocons have got what they have wanted and have a new forever war.
    Hanging-on to every utterance coming out of the administration is really a fools errand.
    Their one trick is to toy with the price of crude.

    Reply ↓
    1. Sunlight Disinfects

      The ‘kite-flying’ is now official policy as reflected in Trump’s TruthSocial message that Yves shared in her post. And Trump is also asserting that Iran has agreed to weapons inspections too. I wouldn’t be surprised if he adds other asserted-agreements over the coming days.

      This is in the context of discord related to Israel occupation of Lebanon and Trump’s threats to bomb the hell out of Iran if the Iranians don’t “behave” / keep their agreements.

      How to make sense of this?

      Like it or not, Israel freedom of action and the greater-Israel project seem to be paramount to USA-Israel. Lebanon is a crucial test of whether Israel will be constrained. And assertions of having God’s favor by Zionist leaders may deepen the import of any restraint.

      As such, it seems to me that Trump-Netanyahu have a two-step plan wrt Lebanon: 1) appeased Iran with sanctions relief; while 2) preparing for an Iran that continues to demand that Israel leave Lebanon.

      If Iran were to threaten, or resort to, ‘kinetic action’ to attempt to force Israel compliance, Trump can point to his set of asserted-agreements as ‘evidence’ that it is unjustified because Iran has ALSO breached the MOU. And a majority of Americans will likely believe Trump.

      So, as meaningless as these Trump utterances seem to be, IMO they raise some serious concerns about the stability of this ‘peace’.

      One might ask:

      ● Are these asserted-agreements just a way for Trump to ‘sell’ the peace to US-Israeli hardliners?

      Hardliners follow developments more closely that other citizens. They will know that the Iranians haven’t agreed, just like the Iranians know.

      ● Is Trump just trying to make Iran agree by making these assertions?

      Iran is already fed-up with Trump. Trump’s making unfounded assertions is not likely to be conducive to Iranian acceptance.

      In addition:

      1) it was agreed that nuclear issues would be discussed at a later date;

      2) preventing Iran from using a $24 billion in frozen funds to fund its “terrorist proxies” is bullshit after removing sanctions that allow Iran to get hundreds of billions of dollars of oil revenue;

      3) the Iranian position is that there is no deal until everything is agreed (and that only really comes with a final agreement), so Trump’s asserted-agreements have no real authority at this time (so why irritate the Iranians with these public assertions?).

      Reply ↓
    2. Paradox of Unrealized Power

      Lookit, there’s not going to be an agreed solution here in this war of choice, the neocons have got what they have wanted and have a new forever war.

      Nope. The US lacks sufficient standoff munitions for a forever war and it lacks the oil supplies to withstand one.

      It doesn’t mean that there won’t be another round of attacks before the reality sets in, though.

      Reply ↓
  12. XXYY

    Even though Iran war news has understandably slowed down a lot in the absence of much in the way of new developments, it still makes sense to provide some information hygiene items to compensate for less-than-great mainstream media reporting and framing.

    Yves, I hope by this you are not even slightly questioning the value of these daily Iran war reports. They are by far the best source on the internet for what’s happening in our latest idiotic military and economic campaign against Iran. I look forward to them with great anticipation, and come away much wiser after reading them.

    All of us are deeply in your debt for what I’m sure is a tremendous extra workload on your part.

    Thank you very much for your dedication to your readership.

    Reply ↓
    4. Glenda

      I fourth that. This is real critical debate and news.

      I appreciate all your work, Yves. Thanks so much for being the voice of reason. (I’m reminding myself to donate again to this blog.)

      And thanks to the commenters and all their intelligent discussion and added news clips.

      Reply ↓
    1. lyman alpha blob

      Ah, the “downed pilot” again, still with no name or photo, in sharp contract to previously rescued military ‘heroes’ – https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jessica_Lynch

      Are they keeping this in the news in a desperate attempt to keep the public from noticing that this ‘rescue’ was actually a botched attempt to steal Iranian uranium? One that makes Carter’s Operation Eagle Claw from 1979 look good by comparison?

      Reply ↓
        1. Safety First

          There is a very popular meme on Russian social media from a 1990s movie:

          “Do you see a groundhog anywhere?”
          [Looks around an empty field] “No?..”
          “And yet, he exists…”

          Reply ↓
      3. Alan

        “It was his second time being shot out of the sky during the Iran war: he had also been among the pilots downed in a friendly fire incident by Kuwaiti forces early in the conflict, according to two of the sources.”

        My guess is Lieutenant Orr.

        Reply ↓
    2. jrkrideau

      New Lebanon-Israel talks begin in shadow of US-Iran deal

      This reminds of the old question of “Who will bell the cat?”
      Once the Israeli and Lebanese Gov’ts are in agreement all they have to do is tell Hezbollah and Iran what has been decided.

      Reply ↓
  14. XXYY

    Reporter: You mentioned Iranian frozen funds could be used to buy American soy.

    I assume these kind of statements by American officials are just for the purpose of buying domestic American support for what sound like concessions to Iran. At the same time, Vance is right to sense back in his lizard brain that an Iran suddenly (relatively) flush with money could be a boon for American exporters.

    Instead of lying to everyone and making up false histories, Vance could just deal with this straight on by offering good terms to Iranian importers who want to buy American stuff with their newfound dollars. Making lemonade out of lemons is a well-accepted business practice, and I think the US administration would still get credit with farmers and whoever else for arrangements like this while at the same time perhaps getting the Iranian business community on side.

    Seems like we would be smart to see the various resets going on in the Middle East as an opportunity change things for the better. Not holding my breath, but still.

    Reply ↓
    1. jrkrideau

      At the same time, Vance is right to sense back in his lizard brain that an Iran suddenly (relatively) flush with money could be a boon for American exporters.

      What can the USA sell to Iran that it cannot buy, probably at a better price from local friends and allies, or from more distant fellow members of BRICS?

      Somehow I don’t see Iranians rushing to buy anything from the country which just assassinated its head of state, and murdered a few thousand of its citizens including the school girls in Minab.

      Reply ↓
  15. Anthony Martin

    Usually, when predicting future performance, one considers current performance. With Trump: the Reflecting Pool, the Ballroom, the Ukraine Conflict, Venezuela, tariffs, inflation, the Israeli pit, etc. Why is anyone even thinking that a positive outcome is possible in the Straits of Hormuz unless tit results in some sort of corruption Trump has been eminently successful in the latter.

    Reply ↓
  16. Sunlight Disinfects

    Latest (wrt Lebanon):

    ● Lebanon ceasefire separate from Iran deal: Rubio

    Negotiating and maintaining a ceasefire in Lebanon will be kept separate from any deal with Iran, Rubio told reporters when he landed in Abu Dhabi.

    “That process is separate. It’s separate because Lebanon is a sovereign country. It has a government, and when it comes to Lebanon and what’s happening inside of Lebanon, we’re going to negotiate and deal directly with the Lebanese government”, he said.

    “There’s an Iranian issue with regards to Lebanon, and that is their support and sponsorship of Hezbollah. And so that factor will be discussed as part of our conversations with the Iranians. But as far as the future of Lebanon, the future of Lebanon belongs to the Lebanese people through their sovereign, elected government. And that’s who we’re going to be working with.”

    ● Israel-Lebanon talks over ceasefire a ‘train wreck’, Israeli ambassador to US says

    The fifth round of US-brokered ceasefire talks regarding Lebanon is a “train wreck”, says Israel’s ambassador to the US, Yechiel Leiter.

    “This is the fifth round of talks, and I must say – we are in a train wreck,” he said in a statement.

    “I fear that the concept of ‘deconfliction’ is misplaced. The only issue is Hezbollah. Hezbollah must be defeated and removed from the equation. Instead, there is a danger that Hezbollah has received a boost. It certainly feels stronger and bolder,” he said.

    Leiter went on to say that dismantling Hezbollah must remain the basis for any ceasefire talks and questioned whether funds that might now be available to Iran will be used to support Hezbollah.

    Reply ↓
    1. lyman alpha blob

      In the world I’d like to live in, Iran would respond by saying that dismantling the terrorist Zionist entity is a precondition for any ceasefire talks. This idea that other nations should be defenseless in the face of an armed to the teeth Israel bent on taking their territory for themselves is farcical.

      Reply ↓
    3. The Rev Kev

      Rubio thinks that Lebanon will be kept separate from any deal with Iran? That’s so quaint that.

      Reply ↓
  17. Paradox of Unrealized Power

    If this is not merely an exercise in Trump acting like the Big Man, you can kiss this deal goodbye.

    Whatever he was thinking, I notice that he basically spewed out his desired bombast without threatening Iran this time–suggesting that Iran’s tactics to walk out were at least partly effective

    Reply ↓
  18. Jason Boxman

    The Iran War’s Persistent Threat to Farmers in Poor Countries (NY Times)

    Like tens of millions of people in lower-income countries worldwide, Mr. Bla was suffering a reversal of fortune as the war in the Middle East damaged his economic prospects.

    And even if a tentative deal between the United States and Iran to end hostilities holds, shortages of critical goods like fuel appeared likely to persist for months. Less fertilizer applied earlier this year means smaller harvests ahead — a driver for higher food prices.

    From Latin America to Africa to Asia, some 33 million people are at risk of falling into poverty this year because of higher food and energy costs, the United Nations Development Program warned in April.

    In the most exposed countries like Sudan and Somalia, the stakes have reached lethal proportions. A doubling of food and fuel prices in areas already threatened by famine has combined with a slashing of the world’s humanitarian relief system to expand the contours of hunger.

    Trump’s war is going to kill a lot of people outside of Iran. Widespread hunger leads to social unrest, as well. Fun times.

    Reply ↓
  19. In Cold Chud

    It seems like any significant difference between what is said behind closed doors and what is put out for domestic use on the rubes would be inherently destabilizing. Even if Trump fully understands that the latter is fiction (a dubious proposition), and genuinely wants peace (or at least to not be Herbert Hoover), warmongers on both sides of the aisle will still be able to use it against him (“I thought you said Iran was going to do this”). It’s not like the messages of glorious victory can be beamed directly into the heads of the 30 percent, bypassing Lindsey Graham and Mark Levin.

    Reply ↓
  20. Tom Stone

    Trump looked awful at the G7 conference,haggard and defeated, yet a few days later he’s bright eyed and bushy tailed?
    Is it due to “Better living through chemistry”?

    Reply ↓
  22. Tom Stone

    This War started out unpopular, it has become moreunpopular and it’s about to get very unpopular indeed within a Month.
    What Trump needs is better messaging!
    “For Lockheed and Inflation” isn’t going to cut it, it needs to be something you could use in a Jingle, like “LSMFT”.
    “Remember the Maine” is reserved for when the US restores democracy to Cuba with Marco Rubio as President of the newest Democracy in the Americas.
    And they need to keep Bibi abd the Zionists out of it “Squirrel, what squirrel?”
    It’s bold, but I suggest “Remember Minab!”.
    “America must rescue the Children of Iran from the brutal tyranny of” what’s his name, the dude with the beard.
    “Think of the Children!”
    Bari Weiss and CBS would go for it, and if CNN were approached properly…they went for “RussiaGate” so why not blame Iran for the Murder of school children?
    Donors would love it.
    I don’t see why this wouldn’t get strong Bi Partisan support, there’s no shortage of Genocidal War lovers on either side of the Aisle
    Think of the Children!
    I do, that drone pic of 168 small graves is one of the most powerful images I have ever been exposed to.

    Can Wuk or one of the other musically inclined members of the Commentariat come up with a good Jingle or new lyrics for an apposite song?
    “The Strait of Hormuz” has a ring to it….perhaps “The streets of Laredo”?

    Reply ↓

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *