As I predicted a couple of days ago, Trump decided the most recently announced peace deal wasn’t good enough. He has sent it back to Tehran with edits. It’s still not clear to me whether the unedited deal was a deal Tehran had approved. It appears Trump is just cranking out performative peace deals and then shooting them down without input from Tehran, just so there can be headlines about peace deals.
At The Atlantic, Karim Sadjadpour explains why there will be no deal, at least with the current negotiators.
America under Trump is the attention-deficit superpower, pinballing from isolationism to interventionism in Venezuela, Iran, and Cuba, having hollowed out the State Department. The Islamic Republic is an obsessive-compulsive revolutionary state—a regime with a half-century fixation on resisting America, rather than advancing the welfare of its own people. Fighting America is not the regime’s policy; it’s the regime’s identity.
The deadlock is both ideological and structural. To justify the immense costs of conflict to American taxpayers, Trump must demand far more from Tehran in any deal than he would have before the war began. Conversely, having lost hundreds of billions of dollars and its top leadership, Iran’s theocracy must demand far more—and concede far less—than it ever would have previously. Neither side can afford a deal that the other might accept. And in a zero-sum negotiation, Iran’s monomaniacal focus is a greater currency than American military power.
And a bit later it says,
U.S.-Iran negotiations yield zero trust and zero closure. A win-win scenario does not exist. Tehran’s nuclear ambitions, threats to close the Strait of Hormuz, regional proxies, and missile programs will menace the Middle East so long as the Islamic Republic is in power.
This is worth reading all the way though. But it seems to me Trump is not going to concede anything as long as the stock market continues to soar every time he announces that another (probably fake) deal is on the table. Why the stock market jumps on command for Trump makes no sense to me, but it does. I seriously doubt there will be an end to anything until Congress steps in and stops it. Maybe next year.
I was intrigued by this headline– Does Trump Want to Lose the Midterms? This is to an Ezra Klein podcast; here is the transcript. The short answer is that he’d probably prefer to win the midterms, but what really worries him is losing control of the Republicans. I suspect he thinks that as long as he controls them, especially Republicans in Congress, he’s safe from facing consequences.
But then the question is, if the GOP is slaughtered in the midterms, will Trump still control it? or will Republicans finally start to break away? Already there’s a lot of focus on the YOLO caucus — Republicans who will not be returning to Congress in January, either because they lost primaries or were already planning to retire. And this crew is already turning into a thorn in Trump’s side. Senators Mitch McConnell and Thom Tillis both spoke out strongly against the infamous slush fund to reward Trump thugs, for example.
So it’s all a matter of how long Trump can keep screws turned on his own party to keep them in line. I honestly don’t understand why Republicans in purple districts haven’t broken away already. But my congressman Mike Lawler recently held a rally with Trump himself, attended by about 4,000 people, which given the population density around here isn’t that impressive. He’s vulnerable, so he’s going more MAGA in a district that voted for Kamala Harris in 2024? That makes no sense. Maybe it’ll get him more campaign money for television ads, somehow. Otherwise I am not seeing the point.
In No One Would Listen, Harry Markopolis described how he very quickly determined that Bernie Madoff was a fraud (he couldn't quite figure out the exact nature of the fraud because it never occurred to him that anyone would run a straight-up Ponzi scheme at that scale), but when he began to question brokers and fund managers, he found that they didn't care. Their checks were cashing and by the time it collapsed they would be gone. Someone else would be left holding the bag.
I think there’s a lot of that in the markets at this moment. It's also worth noting that in 1929 the market was going white-hot until suddenly it wasn't. The market even rallied at the end of the year and was only down 17%, even after Black Friday.
Well, that's not comforting. Oh, well. If there's a crash I just hope it happens while Trump is still in the White House, so he has to own it.
An oldie: "Do you know how to keep a moron in suspense?"
Punch line: "I'll tell you tomorrow."
So Trump keeps playing Lucy with the football (peace deal) and Charlie Brown (Wall Street) keeps falling for the gag. Insiders know when Trump is going to pretend that his time we have an agreement. (Trust me, Charlie Brown.) and again yank away the football.
Gas is under four bucks – I expect it will go back up. As the game goes on, petrolium reserves are depleted. US companies don't have to sell gas from the US to the US. They will follow the money. It seems to me that Europe and India may bid up the price, but it's not that simple to open new supply lines. (tankers have to move the gas.) IMO, this is why Trump is teasing that it will be next week – probably. He can't let the international cartel know that this could drag out for months or they WILL line up tankers from TX to other countries. (Iran does not want to provoke Trump into more bombing, but they should let the world know not to hold their breath on a peace deal.)
I'd expect the Saudis, Kuwait and the UAE to apply pressure to end the war. They are getting killed economically. This was cooked up by Israel to keep Iran from interfering with an invasion of Lebanon and major encroachments in Gaza. I don't get how an alliance with Trump has worked out to benefit the OPEC countries. IF… and I said if… Iran is going to emerge with control of the Straight and retain enough local missile capability to threaten the Arab neighbors, making friendly noises might be a good idea. I can think of no more friendly gesture than asking the US to pull the military out – close the bases. That suggestion is based on my opinion that Iran has won the war economically that they lost militarily.
The longer this drags out, the worse it will be for the GOP in November. The party Trump is planning for next month is collapsing. Entertainers are pulling out. I think MAGA in DC will be outnumbered by No Kings protesters on the mall. Will the wrestling venue have empty seats? They are recruiting from the military to fill seats.
Maybe God will rain on the whole obscene farce.
Own it? No he will say everything is fine or he will blame Biden
He won't have a choice.
It feels like a never-ending episode of the Twilight Zone but really resembles more of the acting out of a pipedream. I recently read an author describing it as a foreign policy based on an attention deficit disorder personality vacillating with a foreign policy based on a personality of an isolationistic idealogue. I am paraphrasing here with a bit of literary license. I don't think the other author hinted at multiple personalities, but this give a similar bi-something confusion with notes of an oh-shiny type attention problem at times and notes off isolationism at other times. The unsettling factor is the gist here.
Then again foreign policy using multiple readings of a foreign policy 8-ball could be at play. A variation of the magic 8-ball of my youth. Digital versions exit on-line of the old one. As to a new foreign policy version, it is totally a speculation that it even exists. I asked the old magic 8-ball and it replied: "I cannot predict now".
Pardon the fail to credit Karim Sadjadpour from the Atlantic link for his notion on our erratic foreign policy. It is good to re-read some things. That one for sure.
Lewis Black, comedian and author of Me of Little Faith, reminds us that the Jewish deity was quite the harsh god. You know, the one that might make an example out of someone by turning them into a pillar of salt. The same deity that historically links also to Iran and its version of fundamentalist monotheism. A re-read reminded me of that fact too.
I generally agree with Karim Sadjadpour's claim that Iran's "focus" gives it the strength to outlast Trump's haphazard applications of US military might, but I'm appalled by much of the rest of his article in the Atlantic (yes, I read it all, a couple times).
I view that article as clear NeoCon propaganda. Sadjadpour takes a few quick swipes at Trump – to get Democrats on his side? – then spends the vast majority of the article painting Iran as an implacable enemy. His implication is clear: negotiations are hopeless, so "regime change" is our only option.
I condemn this as both evil and false.
Evil, because it functions as AIPAC propaganda. Right now, the USA is acting as Israel's Golem, keeping Iran at bay while Israel annexes a new chunk of Southern Lebanon.
False, because I strongly believe that the USA and Iran are NOT implacable enemies, and negotiations could be fruitful if it wasn't for the problems created by Israeli militarism.
Iran is NOT an expansionist Power. Yes, they grabbed a few islands in the Persian Gulf in the early 1970's, but our good buddy Shah Pahlavi was in charge then! Since their revolution, they have been attacked several times; like Russia, their paranoia is sadly sane.
In the 1980's, the USA supplied weapons to Iraq when it invaded Iran. (Horrifically, our "support" included chemical precursors to the poison gas Iraq used against Iran). In 1988, the USS Vincennes shot down Iran Air Flight 655 on its regularly scheduled run to Dubai. Our CIA has consistently armed rebel groups (Kurdish, Baluchi, Azeri, etc) to harass Iran. Mossad has regularly assassinated people (military and civilian) inside Iran for decades. When the US invaded Iraq in 2003, the target in the NeoCons' plan was Iran ("…real men go to Teheran"). If the US Stock Market hadn't crashed in 2007, John McCain might have beaten Obama and gone on to "Bomb, bomb, bomb, Bomb, Bomb Iran".
In 2015, Obama proved that it IS possible to negotiate with Iran on the nuclear weapons/materials issue; the hardest part was overcoming the resistance of NeoCons (and AIPAC Democrats).
Of course, Trump wrecked that deal as soon as he could; I can't blame Iran (and others) for viewing this as evidence that the USA is not a reliable negotiating partner.
Biden probably could have reinstated the JCPOA (if Trump can kill it by fiat, Biden could un-kill it, no?), but that would have pissed off AIPAC Donors…
I'm sure I'm forgetting a few deadly (to Iranians) incidents; if any of you recall any big ones I've missed, plz remind us below.
Skipping forward to last summer, Israel launched a massive missile barrage on Iran *while US was negotiating with Iran* about the nuke issues. Iran retaliated, hitting Israel with missiles and drones. After 12 days, Israel wasn't winning (Iran wasn't either; in that kind of war, everybody loses…); Trump sent B2's to (ostensibly) bomb Iran's underground nuclear enrichment sites. Maybe they "obliterated" Iran's nuke development program; maybe they just blew up a mountain. Iran launched a single retaliatory strike on a US airbase, which made a crater in a runway but killed no US personnel.
And then in February, Bibi talked Trump into another attack on Iran. You all know how that's gone (though we don't know how many Iranians "we" have killed…).
Back to my main point: Sadjadpour ignores ALL of that in his article. With our recent history in mind, I find his last words ("America seeks resolution. Iran is committed to revolution.") to be not merely ironic, but Orwellian.
Easy wins, how we were told we would tire of winning so much. Except now we tire of stagnation. David Stanger writes of the stagnation stage in Trump's quick fixes. We are stagnating way too much.
Brian of Colorado comments, stalemate, not the win, was always the covert aim.
This assumes of course that current leadership can devise execute and succeed at any plan at all involving complex affairs like foreign relations.
When find your child has disassembled your vacuum in a quest to fix it, you don't expect them to put it back together, normally. This point was made by a MSNOW pundit today.
Nothing stable or genius level here. Just more overpromise and much more underdeliver.
At current administrative skill level, we need good outside help and for our childish fixers to stay out of their way. Fat chance of getting either.
Trump Hits the Stalemate Phase of His Interventions in Gaza, Ukraine and Now Iran – The New York Times
From CNN
Here's the latest
• Status of talks: President Donald Trump told ABC News he believes an agreement to reopen the Strait of Hormuz and extend the ceasefire with Iran is reachable “over the next week.” Separately, a regional source told CNN that negotiations were back on track. Earlier, Iran’s state media said Tehran had suspended talks over Israel’s actions in Lebanon.
• US-Israel tension: Trump held a heated phone call with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu as the US president pressed Israel to scale back its Lebanon offensive, according to people familiar with the conversation.
• Ceasefire proposal: Late Monday, Lebanese authorities said they received confirmation of Iran-backed Hezbollah’s agreement to a US proposal for a ceasefire with Israel. However, Netanyahu said Israel would keep striking southern Lebanon “as planned.”
===========================
So Tehran wants Israel to back off in Lebanon. Told the US we are not talking about opening the Straight until you get your dog, Netanyahu on a leash. Trump called and was told to fornicate himself. Trump is saying talks are going great. You decide.
Trump wants the show in DC for his birthday to glorify his victory, which means the Straight has to be open by then. It looks to me like Bibi has launched his own D-Day invasion on Lebanon and Gaza, and he can't/won't back down. IMO, the Gulf States are furious, frantic, and angry about months of zero income. They liked the idea of Iran being cut down to size – turns out Iran is stronger and pissed at the friends of their enemy.
I am not predicting anything, but Iran and the Gulf States could dictate terms to Israel regarding Gaza and Lebanon if Trump simply says, "Israel needs to do their part for the world to stabilize the region." With a private threat to slow down weapons deliveries to something approaching zero if Israel does not back down. I'm not saying this WILL happen, but the political pressure on the major players makes it possible.
This could be good news, but I'm not celebrating yet.
Fresh articles in Axios and The Telegraph confirm Doug's info, with some Extra Sauce (Trump tells Bibi "Everybody hates you now") and a few more details.
The most important detail that I saw makes it sound like Bibi has agreed to stop bombing southern Beirut, and to keep Israeli troops out of there. That sounds great, but I don't think Israel ever expected to move troops that far north; and I've seen nothing about removing Israeli troops from the sections of southern Lebanon that they have already overrun.
Sadly, Trump's infamous lack of focus (see OP) means that Bibi can probably get away with annexing Lebanese territory up to the Litani (or Zahrani?) River without breaking any of his new "promises" to Trump.
I wonder how long Trump will continue his boy who cried wolf routine with Iran peace deals? Its not unlike his Healthcare plan in two weeks! con he's been running since his first term. Each time he does it, its to buy time to avert eyes from the truth, that he’s a loser and he has nothing. Its getting to the point where these "peace deals" announcements are beginning to be met with a collective yawn.
I wonder how long Trump will continue his boy who cried wolf routine with his peace deal? Its not unlike his Healthcare plan in 2 weeks! con he's been running since his first term. Each time he does it, its to buy time before having to face he has nothing. Its getting to the point where these "peace deals" announcements are met with a collective yawn.
And how in blazes can any sane person think that Drumpty can "broker" a peace deal, when it actually has to be between Israel and Iran? Especially when Drumpty has bombed the sh*t out of Iran while supplying munitions to Israel?
I don't think that yelling at Bing Yaming on a phone call makes Drumpty seem "neutral" to Iran. All he can do is make demands and stamp his feet. Adults will ignore him.
DJT is giving up the anti-weaponization fund, but no mention of immunity to tax investigation and penalties clause. It's a good thing we all trust him to do the right thing, or I'd be warning of deceit in the works.
Oh, the snark, the snark !!