Share.

    11 Kommentare

    1. Vivian Salama and Nancy A. Youssef: “If it feels as though Washington and Tehran have been on the verge of a deal before, it’s because they have. At least 38 times during the months of negotiations to end the war in Iran, President Trump has suggested that an agreement was within reach, only for new disputes, military escalations, or competing narratives to push the finish line further away.

      “Diplomacy has unfolded against a backdrop of strikes and counterstrikes, threats of wider conflict, and cease-fires that Trump has defined as ‘shooting in a more moderate manner.’ The president has made a stream of public claims that were subsequently contradicted by events, sometimes only hours later.

      “The latest proposed deal would combine nuclear restrictions, economic incentives, and a broader regional de-escalation effort. It would specifically address the reopening of the Strait of Hormuz; Iran would end its disruption of shipping traffic and, in exchange, eventually receive access to frozen assets and phased sanctions-relief on its oil exports. It would also start the clock on negotiations over the fate of Iran’s nuclear material, and establish a framework under which Iran could receive financial incentives if it fulfills its obligations … 

      “The nuclear provisions remain at the center of the negotiations. The idea, officials told us, is that Iran would make an indefinite commitment to not developing or acquiring a nuclear weapon (which they had done before the war), and it would take steps toward dismantling its nuclear program, including the on-site destruction and removal of the enriched uranium needed to fabricate a weapon. But administration officials acknowledge that commitments alone will not be enough, and consistent compliance is far from guaranteed … 

      “Officials from nations that are on the periphery of the conflict told us that they are deeply skeptical that Iran would adhere to such an agreement. Some worry that the terms were rushed, in part because Trump has made clear that he wants to see an end to a conflict that was intended to last only six weeks and is now in its fourth month. The war has rattled global markets and sent gas prices in the U.S. soaring while dividing Trump’s own MAGA coalition. ‘The Iranians are positioning to milk it,’ one Persian Gulf official told us.”

      Read more: [https://theatln.tc/aHddGHog](https://theatln.tc/aHddGHog

    2. Yea, right, whatever.

      I’ll see it when we get there, they have been crying Wolf for what, 40 times?

      This is all kindergarten level, or worse, psycho level idiocy.

    3. Elegant-Fisherman555 on

      Honestly Atlantic, either post gift articles or excerpts here.

      At this point it seems like you’re karma farming.

      Vis a vis any deal, I’ll not get my hopes up because having heard a deal was close every Thursday/Friday for the last three months or so I remain somewhat skeptical as I think most here do.

      As the saying goes, fool me once shame on you, fool me twice shame on me, try and fool me every week consecutively for three months I stop listening.

    4. couldbeahumanbean on

      What is this?

      Nothing but a headline and an ad for a subscription.

      This is not news. It’s literally an ad for the Atlantic. There is no substantive information here.

      Shame.

    5. The obsession and overuse of the word “deal” in the Trump era is bizarre. It’s symbolic of the oversimplification and dumbing down of complex geopolitical and economic, cultural and historical issues into business deals. It’s like everyone thinks everything is all about making deals. It’s so pathetic

    6. I don’t even understand why this horse shit is ever in the news anymore. 

    7. DefinitelyNotMeee on

      Full text (part 1)

      If it feels as though Washington and Tehran have been on the verge of a deal before, it’s because they have. At least 38 times during the months of negotiations to end the war in Iran, President Trump has suggested that an agreement was within reach, only for new disputes, military escalations, or competing narratives to push the finish line further away.

      Diplomacy has unfolded against a backdrop of strikes and counterstrikes, threats of wider conflict, and cease-fires that Trump has defined as “shooting in a more moderate manner.” The president has made a stream of public claims that were subsequently contradicted by events, sometimes only hours later. Even today, after senior administration officials said that negotiators have largely settled the text of a memorandum of understanding, the agreement remains unsigned.

      The latest proposed deal would combine nuclear restrictions, economic incentives, and a broader regional de-escalation effort. It would specifically address the reopening of the Strait of Hormuz; Iran would end its disruption of shipping traffic and, in exchange, eventually receive access to frozen assets and phased sanctions-relief on its oil exports. It would also start the clock on negotiations over the fate of Iran’s nuclear material, and establish a framework under which Iran could receive financial incentives if it fulfills its obligations. Negotiators have made substantial progress in recent weeks and have drafted language that both sides appear prepared to accept, although no signing date or location has been finalized. “We’re not quite at the finish line yet, but we are very close,” a senior Trump-administration official told reporters on the condition of anonymity in a call this afternoon. Iran’s foreign minister, Abbas Araghchi, confirmed on X that the two sides are close to an agreement, and his ministry said that most issues have been resolved. Even a temporary deal might allow Trump to declare the war effectively over. It would also enable the Iranian regime to demonstrate that it remains standing, despite weeks of pounding from U.S. and Israeli air strikes.

      The nuclear provisions remain at the center of the negotiations. The idea, officials told us, is that Iran would make an indefinite commitment to not developing or acquiring a nuclear weapon (which they had done before the war), and it would take steps toward dismantling its nuclear program, including the on-site destruction and removal of the enriched uranium needed to fabricate a weapon. But administration officials acknowledge that commitments alone will not be enough, and consistent compliance is far from guaranteed.

      “I don’t think the Iranians trust us, and I don’t think the United States trusts the Iranians,” the senior administration official said. “We’re trying to set up a process whereby we can build that trust, bring this thing to a close, accomplish something meaningful for both Iran and the United States of America. And that’s how we set up this negotiation. It’s not based around trust, not based around empty promises, but based around verifiable steps that are good for the United States and good for Iran.”

      Officials from nations that are on the periphery of the conflict told us that they are deeply skeptical that Iran would adhere to such an agreement. Some worry that the terms were rushed, in part because Trump has made clear that he wants to see an end to a conflict that was intended to last only six weeks and is now in its fourth month. The war has rattled global markets and sent gas prices in the U.S. soaring while dividing Trump’s own MAGA coalition. “The Iranians are positioning to milk it,” one Persian Gulf official told us.

    8. littleredpinto on

      And using the same headline…..They **might not**…..that is kinda how the word might works.

    Leave A Reply