📄This is my guess for the content of the potential US-Iran deal based on the Iranian and American statements I have seen and what is reasonable considering the balance of power: ●The US, Iran, and their allies would commit to a 60-day truce on all fronts, including Lebanon. The 60-day can be extended (which I believe will be extended until the end of the mid-term elections). ●The US and Iran would agree to lift the blockade. ●Iran would commit not to pursue nuclear weapons. Iran has made this commitment many times before, but including it in the deal would give Trump something to highlight politically. ●Iran and the US would agree to continue negotiations for 60 days on the removal or dilution of highly enriched uranium (HEU), as well as a pause or reduction in nuclear enrichment, in exchange for full sanction relief. ●Sanctions on Iranian oil would be lifted for 60 days. While this would benefit the Iranian regime, it would also benefit Trump by helping lower oil prices more quickly. ●Iran will commit to no enrichment in this period and no attempt to recover the buried nuclear material. ●Iran commits to allow IAEA full access to all aspects of its nuclear activities. ●The US would commit not to increase its military presence in the region during the 60-day period. 🚫What you won’t see in the deal: ●No mention of payments to Iran. Any release of frozen Iranian funds would likely be handled outside the agreement to avoid creating political problems for Trump. The UAE and Qatar would most likely facilitate these transfers. ●No mention of tolls in the Strait of Hormuz. The US would not want to publicly acknowledge such an arrangement, but by omitting any reference to “no tolls,” it could effectively allow Iran to impose them on the Iranian side. ●No mention of US forces leaving the Middle East. Iran has reportedly raised this issue, but it is a non-starter for Washington and is unlikely to be included in any agreement.

Today's front page of Hamshahri, the daily newspaper affiliated with Ghalibaf, with the headline: "The Last Performance of a Loser" 👇

The US government, citing national security authorities, has issued an export control directive to suspend all access to Fable 5 and Mythos 5 by any foreign national, whether inside or outside the United States, including foreign national Anthropic employees. The net effect of this order is that we must abruptly disable Fable 5 and Mythos 5 for all our customers to ensure compliance. Access to all other Claude models is not affected. We apologize for this disruption to our customers. We believe this is a misunderstanding and are working to restore access as soon as possible. Read our full statement: anthropic.com/news/fable-myt…

As a dissident, it is painful to watch this. Over the past few months of the Iran-US conflict, the Iranian regime has played its limited cards remarkably well. One reason a dictatorship built around a seventh-century ideology is outplaying the most powerful democracy in the world is that, in this case, it appears to have a better decision-making process. There is a surprisingly active space for the regime analysts to debate policy; of course within the regime's ideological boundaries. Iran’s Supreme National Security Council, or SNSC, brings together different stakeholders and different viewpoints within the system. Even with the Supreme Leader being the final decision maker, the debates and votings in the SNSC are real and influence the outcome. This has helped the regime avoid some of the catastrophic mistakes made by other dictatorships, such as Saddam Hussein’s Iraq or Qaddafi’s Libya. In the United States, we often lack that kind of structured decision-making process. NSC is mostly an advisory council to the president and is only as strong as the president allows it to be. When the president personalizes foreign policy, the process collapses into court politics: advisers compete for access, agencies maneuver around each other, and decisions reflect the president’s instincts rather than an institutional consensus. One possible solution would be to expand the mandate of the National Security Council to get a formal vote on major foreign policy decisions which the president would be allowed to veto. Another solution is to expand the membership to representatives from Congress, as well as independent council members appointed by the president or Congress. Some of these members could serve across administrations to reduce the sharp swings in US foreign policy between Democratic and Republican presidents.

In analyzing the situation in Middle East, there are valuable news quotes that you have to interpret them exactly the opposite to extract the value: “The source, who declined to be named due to the sensitivity of the matter, told Reuters that unfreezing the assets was "directly linked to ensuring safe passage through the Strait of Hormuz", a key issue in talks aimed at ending the conflict.” Translation: The unfreezing has nothing to do with the safe passage through Hormuz and is the payment for the US-Iran deal. reuters.com/world/middle-eas…

مشکل جمهوری اسلامی با یک توافق محدود حل نمی‌شود. اسرائیل و آمریکا دست از سر جمهوری اسلامی برنخواهند داشت. همان‌طور که دو بار غافلگیرش کردند، بار دیگر هم ممکن است به شکل دیگری به سراغش بروند. ترامپ هنوز برای دو سال و نیم دیگر رئیس‌جمهور آمریکاست. در این جنگ ثابت شد که حملات موشکی جمهوری اسلامی آسیب محدودی ایجاد می‌کنند و بازدارندگی لازم را ندارند. تنها برگ برنده جمهوری اسلامی تنگه هرمز بود. ارزش تنگه هرمز هم به مرور کمتر خواهد شد؛ هم کشورهای حوزه خلیج فارس راه‌های صادراتی دیگری خواهند ساخت و هم کشورهای دنیا ظرفیت ذخایر استراتژیک خود را افزایش خواهند داد. در درازمدت جمهوری اسلامی بیش از دو راه‌حل ندارد: ۱- عادی‌سازی کامل روابط با آمریکا و کنار گذاشتن اسرائیل‌ستیزی. ۲- ساخت بمب هسته‌ای. راه‌حل میانه‌ای برای جمهوری اسلامی وجود ندارد.

My guess is that the US payments to the Iranian regime will be structured either as an agreement between the UAE and Iran or as some sort of humanitarian payments. Obama’s problem was that he wasn’t creative enough.

Hardline Iranian MP Mahmoud Nabavian: Having reviewed the text of the agreement, I must state that, compared to the previous two versions, it is more damaging, and Iran's concessions have also become greater.

In the US/Iran negotiations, each side only works on their own draft!

Iran fired several drones tonight at commercial vessels attempting to transit Strait of Hormuz. On background for a senior US defense official: “It appears Iran has attempted to strike commercial ships transiting the Strait of Hormuz tonight. U.S. forces shot down two Iranian one-way attack drones. Traffic flow through the Strait continues.”

IRAN AND ISRAEL BOTH DENY EXISTENCE OF ANY AGREEMENT. - N12 NEWS

President Trump previews that the U.S. will strike Iran again tonight and says seizing Kharg Island and taking control of Iran’s oil and gas markets is in the future.

NOW: Bahrain says warning sirens have been sounded, with Kuwait Army reporting that air defenses are engaging hostile aerial targets from Iran.

US officials saying strikes are to increase pressure on the regime to make a deal Again showing a fundamental misunderstanding of the regime This tactic is guaranteed to fail Either just walk away Or go for regime change Period

اینا هنوز آدم نشدند. در پایان هم، مثل همیشه در اوج ضعف و بدون گرفتن هیچ امتیازی، مجبور به توافق می‌شن. البته این دفعه با یه ایران ویران‌تر و فقیرتر.

US-Iran negotiations have completely collapsed.

The Trump administration has chosen to escalate for now. Most likely, the price of oil will continue to rise over the next few weeks. Higher oil prices would heavily impact China. China might start using its leverages on both parties to end this war.

The Trump administration is under heavy pressure to reopen Hormuz soon to prevent oil prices from skyrocketing. The administration has two options, neither of them good: 1) Accept an interim deal in which Iran reopens Hormuz, the U.S. lifts the blockade, and nuclear discussions are postponed. In this case, Iran would be unlikely to give in to U.S. demands later. 2) Escalate militarily to force the Iranian government to reopen Hormuz and accept a deal that Iran considers lopsided. Again, it is unlikely that the Iranian government would agree to such a deal under pressure. At this point, trust between the two sides is so broken that the chance of a multi-phase deal is very small. A multi-phase deal would not be balanced at every step: some steps would favor Iran, and others would favor the U.S. With the lack of trust between the parties, both sides are demanding that the benefits for them be front-loaded into the deal and their concessions be postponed.

US airstrikes have begun targeting Iran: US official tells me. Explosions heard in Sirik, Minab, Isfahan and Qeshm Island.

پیام شما : آتش‌سوزی در میدان قیام تهران در یک انبار فرش رخ داده.