ABNA24 - In early morning of Wednesday and after Iran's IRGC published a list of potential reciprocal targets in the US allies and the Israeli regime in reaction to Trump's threat of destruction of Iran's power infrastructure and bridges, the White House in the last moments of the deadline accepted a proposed ceasefire deal presented by Pakistani prime minister for a two-werk period.
Approval of this ceasefire after nearly 40 days of fierce fighting and strict resistance of Iran, especially when it comes to keeping the Strait of Hormuz closed as an oil and gas artery to the hostile sides, gained international welcome, since during this time the world markets, as Tehran earlier warned, were strained by a serious crisis characterized by shortage in supply of hydropons, and the fuel and food prices and transportation fees surged.
The international community, almost unanimously alarmed by the risk of the region, and even the world, sliding into economic chaos and instability, are unanimously speaking out against Trump's adventurism and call for fast end to the war. Now they look to see where the negotiations will go under the current fragile ceasefire.
Governments across the globe, especially Washington’s European allies, point to the Iranian people’s resolve and unwillingness to yield, arguing that staying out of this unwinnable confrontation is the only sensible course. They insist that a political solution is the sole way forward, one that would require Trump, in these talks, to accept a realistic outcome based on acknowledging the failure of his military campaign.
Obvious US defeat: Iran's upper hand in war of narratives
As Washington and Tehran accept a two-week truce, a war of narratives erupts in political and media space about the base of the forthcoming Islamabad talks.
One side of this war is the content of the talks. Trump, a politician notorious for his fake statements and treachery regarding his promises, claims that his 15-point proposal, which Iran had earlier totally rejected, is to stand ground for the negotiations. On the opposite side, Iran asserts that its 10-point proposal should make the foundation for dialogue.
Given the wide gap between the US 15‑point proposal and its 10‑point Iranian peer, analysts and media outlets say whichever blueprint becomes the basis for renewed talks will be read as a clear signal of who is emerging from the war as the winner, and who is not.
At present, most international, and even American, analysts and outlets, including CNN, are pointing to Iran's Supreme National Security Council’s statement and to comments by senior Iranian officials such as the foreign minister and the president, who assert they are imposing their political will on their American adversary as the latter began to lose control over course of war.
While the White House avoided to release a statement in which it insists that Iran approved of the 15-point proposal, Iran's statement released by Supreme National Security Council made it clear that the US has, in principle, committed to non‑aggression; to maintaining Iran’s control over the Strait of Hormuz; to accepting enrichment; to lifting all primary and secondary sanctions; to ending all UN Security Council and IAEA Board of Governors resolutions; to compensating Iran; to withdrawing American combat forces from the region; and to halting the war on all fronts, including against the heroic Islamic Resistance in Lebanon.”
Another dimension of the battle of narratives surrounding the ceasefire is the question of who actually wanted a ceasefire and who felt the need to stop the fighting.
Here too, Tehran holds the upper hand in the war of narratives. Even as certain London‑based Persian‑language outlets try to frame the ceasefire as Iran’s fear of Trump’s threats against its infrastructure, most international media outlets describe it instead as Trump’s attempt to bring at least a temporary and partial calm to the oil market and prevent further losses in US financial markets through this two‑week ceasefire, especially after all his efforts to force open the Strait of Hormuz through military pressure failed, and after Iran refused to accept a 40‑day ceasefire.
Shaky ceasefire, fingers on trigger
Iran's officials and public do not have the least trust in the US in these talks; neither in fruitfulness of the talks given Trump's strategic failure in reaching his goals and his tactical need to reopen the Strait of Hormuz, even temporarily, for balancing oil prices, nor even in the American side's honesty given Washington’s betrayal of the diplomacy in two wars.
So, senior Iranian political and military officials say that Iran's armed forces are clocked and loaded like the past 40 days, ready to resolutely respond to any repeat of aggression.
Iranian negotiators are engaging in talks with the upper hand that the armed forces’ sacrifices, along with the remarkable nationwide unity shown in street demonstrations supporting the frontlines, have created. Their aim is to ensure that just as the Iranian people imposed their military will on the invading enemy, they will now, on the political stage, force that same adversary, which is scrambling to escape the quagmire, to bow to a powerful Iran, lift the sanctions, and provide guarantees of non‑aggression toward Iran and Tehran's resistance allies.
Smart control of Strait of Hormuz continues, oil market in suspension
In such a ambiguous atmosphere of the war of narratives and unstable ceasefire, Iran holds firm its core superiority factor, namely Strait of Hormuz. Continued control of the key waterway will lead to impose Iran's superiority in the war of narratives and the negotiations, and most importantly secure final victory in the conflict.
By maintaining this trump card, the Islamic Republic, firstly, has proven to the world that it forced the enemies to accept the ceasefire since Washington’s main demand that shipping return to pre-war status in the Strait of Hormuz has not materialized.
Secondly, restoring navigation in the Strait of Hormuz under Iran’s smart‑control mechanism undercuts Trump’s tactical goal of calming the oil market and cooling financial volatility. Even with the announcement of a two‑week ceasefire, oil prices remain far from their pre‑war levels, a sign that the oil market turns a deaf ear to the US president's assurances.
Thirdly, by holding control of the strait, through which about 30 percent of the world's seaborne oil transits, Tehran has shown that return to pre-war navigation in this strategic sea gate is unthinkable, something suggesting that what will make the base of the framework of the Pakistan negotiations, and which the US has approved, is Iran's 10-point proposal in which toll payment for navigation through the Strait of Hormuz is one of the terms of Iran for an ultimate end to war.
/129
Your Comment