This is how Ilan Berman, deputy head of the Washington analytical center of the American Foreign Policy Council, assessed the talks in an interview for the Polish Press Agency. In his opinion, what may be created in the coming weeks will be preliminary and temporary. Both capitals are aware of this, but that is why they are motivated to come to the table.
Read also: Oil prices are rising in Europe and cheaper in the USA. The market reacts to the American army's attack on Iran
On Tuesday, as reported by the Associated Press, the American military – despite the ongoing truce and parallel peace talks – struck Iranian missile launchers and mine-laying units. The US military justified these actions with the right of self-defense. However, available information does not indicate that the attacks interrupted the diplomatic dialogue between the two countries.
On Monday, Donald Trump published an entry on the Truth Social platform, in which he assessed that talks with Iran were going well. The US president emphasized that the goal of the negotiations is to end the war and open the Strait of Hormuz to navigation. However, it is not known when the possible agreement will be finalized or when it would enter into force.
Two capitals under time pressure
Berman pointed out that internal problems weigh heavily on the American president. His ratings are falling, and the failure to end the war before the November parliamentary elections may weaken the Republican Party. This is one of the main reasons why the administration wants quick results.
The situation on the Iranian side is equally tense, although for different reasons. The American blockade of fuel exports, if maintained in the long term, devastates the country's economy. — Thanks to the agreement, Iran will buy some time to stabilize its economic situation – added the deputy head of AFPC.
Strait of Hormuz at the center of negotiations
For now, the public only knows the general contours of the emerging agreement. According to an expert, its core could concern the Strait of Hormuz — Tehran would stop charging fees for transporting fuel through this route, and in return, Washington would lift the blockade. – This is an initial phase, preparing the ground for talks on the Iranian nuclear program – said the PAP source.
If the preliminary agreement reduces tensions between the countries, further talks may last up to 30 to 60 days. The American side will press for the transfer of highly enriched uranium and the admission of international inspectors to Iran's nuclear centers. This is a key point on which the further course of negotiations depends.
In Tuesday's post, Trump clarified Washington's expectations on this matter. Iran would immediately hand over the enriched uranium to the United States, which would take it home and destroy it. The second variant assumes the destruction of the material on site in cooperation with the Islamic Republic of Iran. The operation would be overseen by the U.S. Atomic Energy Commission or its equivalent.
Ted Cruz's skepticism about the deal
Berman pointed out that the administration itself would consider Tehran's withdrawal from the nuclear program a success. However, the real victory would only be a fundamental change of the regime in this country. When asked about the feasibility of such a scenario, the analyst admitted that the current signals regarding the shape of the agreement do not give reasons for optimism.
There is a risk that Washington will not be able to permanently limit Iran's nuclear ambitions. Since the agreement is to lift sanctions, the regime will be financially strengthened instead of weakened. Similar doubts were raised on Platform X by the Republican senator from Texas, Ted Cruz, warning that the Iranian authorities will receive billions of dollars that will be used to enrich uranium, while Islamists chanting slogans against America will remain at the helm.
— I think President Trump has a problem because if we conclude an agreement in which Iran only temporarily delays its nuclear program and in return receives significant financial relief, it will start to look very much like Barack Obama's agreement, the expert noted.
The shadow of the 2015 JCPOA agreement.
Berman recalled that during his first term, Trump criticized the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) agreement concluded with Iran in 2015. The signatories of this document were – apart from the US – Great Britain, France, Russia, China, Germany and the European Union. In 2018, the then-president took the United States out of that agreement.
The main criticism of the JCPOA was its excessive generosity towards Tehran. In exchange for suspending some nuclear work and submitting to international controls, the signatories lifted economic sanctions. The agreement did not refer to ballistic missiles or Iran's support for terrorist groups.
Abraham Accords as an additional condition
A complication is the idea of linking the new agreement with the accession of several Persian Gulf countries and Turkey to the so-called Abraham Accords. These agreements, negotiated during Trump's first term, were intended to normalize Israel's relations with the Arab states — the United Arab Emirates and Bahrain. The inclusion of additional countries is currently a condition set by Washington.
According to Berman, persuading Arab countries to normalize relations with Israel – often against the sentiment of their own citizens – will now be extremely difficult. The region's capitals are focused primarily on solving tensions and restoring transit through Hormuz. Everything else fades into the background.
— However, Trump set the condition for extending the Abraham Accords because he wants to somehow reassure Israel, which is not satisfied with negotiations that only benefit the US. It's a consolation prize, Berman explained.
Tehran's advantage and Pew polls
When asked whether it would ultimately be possible to force Tehran to significantly limit its nuclear program – because that was the original goal of the war – the analyst replied that it might be difficult. The regime in Iran is convinced that it is winning the confrontation. — They look at the United States and see all of President Trump's political problems and conclude that they have an advantage. And that means they are less willing to compromise, Berman concluded.
According to a Pew Research Center study from May 1 this year. shows that support for Trump was 34%. This is the president's worst result in his second term. One of the biggest declines was in the category of keeping promises – now 38%. respondents believe that this term fits the president, who assured during the 2024 campaign that he would not start any war. In August last year, 43 percent were inclined to believe in the promises of the host of the White House. subjects.
