AhlulBayt News Agency (ABNA): The New York Times, in an op-ed by Nicholas Kristof, wrote that while Donald Trump had previously conditioned the end of the war with Iran on Tehran's "unconditional surrender," the preliminary agreement reached is, in practice, nothing but a "conditional surrender of the United States"!
According to this newspaper, the new agreement grants extensive concessions to Iran, including the immediate release of billions of dollars of Iran's frozen assets, the establishment of a $300 billion fund for the reconstruction of the country, and also opening the way for Iran to take control of at least part of the Strait of Hormuz within the next 60 days and collect tolls from passing ships.
The New York Times also pointed to the sharp criticism from a number of Republicans. Conservative commentator Erick Erickson wrote, "Trump has surrendered to Iran." Senator Bill Cassidy, another Republican, also described the agreement as "the worst foreign policy mistake in decades."
Trump's Main Mistake Was Not Exiting the War; It Was Starting a War That Iran Won
Kristof emphasizes that although the agreement constitutes a major defeat for Washington, Trump's fundamental error was not ending the war, but starting it.
According to him, continuing the war would only have led to increased casualties, exacerbated the global economic crisis, and damaged the Republicans' position in the midterm elections, and the US President ultimately had no choice but to retreat!
The article explicitly states, "The bitter truth is that Iran won the war and for that reason gained the upper hand in negotiations."
The New York Times adds that Trump delayed the agreement until the last moment because he knew that any agreement he could reach would be humiliating for him, but military defeat had left him with no favorable exit.
The author emphasized that this crisis once again demonstrated that starting unnecessary wars, the excessive self-confidence of politicians, and the illusion of easy victory can lead to heavy defeats, and that America must rely more than ever on diplomacy.
Trump Created the Nuclear Crisis Himself by Destroying Obama's Agreement
Kristof further considers the root of the current crisis to be Trump's decision to withdraw from the 2015 nuclear agreement.
According to him, under the framework of the Barack Obama administration's agreement, Iran had removed almost all of its enriched uranium from the country, limited the level of enrichment, and agreed to extensive inspections, but Trump, Benjamin Netanyahu, and hardline factions fiercely attacked this agreement.
The New York Times recalls that Trump in 2018 called the Obama agreement "very bad" and said he would never release Iran's money and could achieve a better deal.
In the author's view, Trump's withdrawal from the nuclear agreement predictably caused Iran to develop its nuclear program and gave rise to a new crisis.
The article adds that even in February 2026, Trump had the opportunity to reach a suitable agreement without war, but instead "recklessly" launched military strikes, without an exit strategy and without even properly calculating the consequences of a possible closure of the Strait of Hormuz.
Citing the Trojan War in Homer's Iliad, the New York Times warns that history has repeatedly shown that the more ambitious the military objectives, the greater the likelihood of being caught in a catastrophe.
This War May Push Iran Further Toward Nuclear Weapons
According to the New York Times, the new agreement has not only failed to resolve Iran's nuclear program issue, but has deferred it to future negotiations, and may even push Iran further toward building nuclear weapons.
Kristof predicts that Tehran will likely prolong the negotiations, Trump will have no inclination to accept an agreement similar to the JCPOA, and ultimately, as with the Gaza file, he will lose interest in the matter, while the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), which according to the author has now gained more power, may follow the North Korean model and seek a nuclear arsenal to consolidate its regional superiority.
The article also describes the costs of the war as very heavy and writes that America has been weakened and thousands of people, mainly Iranians and Lebanese, have lost their lives; in addition, 13 American soldiers have also been killed. Quoting Linda Bilmes, a professor at Harvard University, the final cost of this war, including the reconstruction of bases, replacement of equipment, and long-term services to the wounded, will likely reach one trillion dollars—money that, according to the New York Times, could have been spent on health insurance, higher education, child care, or humanitarian aid.
The author concludes by emphasizing that the greatest betrayal in this war has been against the ordinary people of Iran; the Iranian people, according to Trump, had heard promises of receiving help from America, but it did not yield a favorable result. Referring to a report about the deportation of an Iranian woman from the United States to the Central African Republic, the author describes this action as an example of "American indifference."
The report concludes by stating that although the recent agreement is worthy of criticism, the main tragedy is not Trump's exit from the war, but the war itself that he started—a war that, according to this newspaper, once again demonstrated that whenever warmongering politicians with excessive self-confidence promise easy victory, one should be warned of its consequences.
**************
End/ 345E
