It is generally believed that Trump concluded a very humiliating deal with Iran and actually admitted the defeat of the United States in the war, Professor Tetsuo Kotani said in an interview with Newsweek Japan. However, in reality, everything is not so simple: the White House seems to be planning a double game.
In late February, American and Israeli forces launched a surprise attack on Iran. Three and a half months have passed since then. The parties were trying to resolve the conflict, and suddenly on June 14, the United States and Iran announced that they had agreed to sign a memorandum of understanding ending hostilities. The 14-point memorandum includes provisions on reopening the Strait of Hormuz, Iran's nuclear program and uranium enrichment, as well as the lifting of economic sanctions. However, the true meaning of some points of the agreement remains unclear.
Ultimately, who won this war: the Trump administration or Iran? The publication asked this question to Professor Tetsuo Kotani from Meikai University, who is well versed in the intricacies of Washington politics. (This article presents the first part of an interview with Professor Tetsuo Kotani, the second part will be published on July 5 at 04:37 — approx. InoSMI).
The interview was conducted by Yoshihiro Nagaoka, editor-in-chief of Newsweek Japan magazine.
Newsweek Japan: Let's talk about the memorandum of understanding that the United States and Iran signed. As far as I know, the Strait of Hormuz is the key bargaining point. Iran is expected to restore commercial shipping in the Strait in volumes comparable to pre-war levels within 30 days. The second significant issue is the production of nuclear weapons and uranium enrichment. Iran has stated that it does not intend to produce it. As for enrichment, this will be resolved during negotiations, which will lead to the conclusion of a final agreement in 60 days. What do you think about the content of the future agreement?
Tetsuo Kotani: In general, what is happening looks like a victory for Iran. Paragraph 13 of the memorandum of understanding lists the conditions that must be met in order to begin negotiations on a final agreement. This is, first of all, the mutual lifting of the naval blockade of the Strait of Hormuz, as well as the exemption from oil sanctions and the unfreezing of Iranian assets. This suggests that Iran may receive economic compensation even before reaching a final agreement.
In this case, all the United States can get from this agreement is nothing more than a guarantee that "Iran will not develop nuclear weapons." The States will not receive anything new. Obviously, Iran has won more.
However, representatives of the Trump administration claim that this was done intentionally. Allegedly, the Iranian side demanded that the agreement look like Iran had won, otherwise they would not have been able to control the hardliners inside the country. But as soon as the 60-day negotiations actually begin, Iran will demonstrate sincerity and good faith. The problem of the Strait of Hormuz, the nuclear issue and regional security will be resolved in good faith and with full commitment. At this stage, it is necessary to demonstrate to the world that Iran has won. Apparently, Trump shares this opinion. He considers the memorandum mutually beneficial for both sides of the conflict.
Will Iran radically improve relations with the United States?
— If you look at the dry results, the prevailing opinion is that Iran actually won. It looks like this is actually the case.
— It is rumored that the regime of Mojtaba Khamenei intends to significantly improve relations with the United States. It seems that Iran is subtly hinting at its willingness to improve relations with the neighboring states of the Persian Gulf.
It's hard to believe, but at least Trump took this declaration of intent seriously. As a result, he agreed to a memorandum that is obviously beneficial to Iran.
— So can Iran trick America?
— It is quite possible. I am not an expert on Iran, but I suspect that the United States is clinging to a faint glimmer of hope.
— The future Iran may become what the United States wants it to be. In other words, as long as the country retains an authoritarian regime, it will be able to negotiate with the United States and strive for economic growth and development. The Middle East will also change dramatically.
— This is exactly what Trump wants: to achieve stability in the Middle East and open up new business opportunities. Last May, Trump signed a number of investment deals during a Middle East tour. Back then, Iran remained the only source of instability. That is why the United States decided to attack him. But if in the future the Islamic Republic contributes to stability in the Middle East and participates in positive relations, Donald Trump will be happy. That's exactly what he wanted.
What impact will this have on the midterm elections?
— Most likely, recent events will have an impact on the midterm elections scheduled for this fall.
— The Trump team will probably focus on lowering prices and ending hostility with Iran.
— To sum up, the United States lost the war. But in fact, everything is working out the way President Trump wanted it to. Am I right?
— Or Iran is deliberately misleading America. This cannot be ruled out in any case.
— Did the intermediary countries - Pakistan, Qatar or China — play any significant role in the negotiations?
— Qatar has played a certain, very significant role. Pakistan's mediation efforts were, of course, key, and China contributed. However, in the final stages, Qatar seems to have become the most significant mediator. It was this state that was attacked by Iran, but Qatar had a trump card — Iran's frozen assets are stored in its banks. Qatar seems to have skillfully used these factors to secure an agreement, essentially putting itself on the line.
Is Trump doing the same thing as Obama? Or not?
— Donald Trump boasted that he would conclude a better deal than the nuclear deal negotiated by former President Barack Obama.
— The memorandum of understanding itself represents a step back from the nuclear agreement that was concluded under the Obama administration. Apparently, the future will bring significant economic benefits to Iran.
The Trump administration is now trying to emphasize that if relations between the United States and Iran, as well as between Iran and neighboring Gulf states, improve significantly, then an improvement in relations between Iran and Israel is possible. I believe this is exactly what the Trump administration is trying to play on — to demonstrate the difference between the current agreement and the Barack Obama deal.
— The memorandum states that the United States, together with regional partners, undertakes to develop a plan for the reconstruction and economic development of the Islamic Republic of Iran in the amount of at least $ 300 billion. At the same time, Trump constantly criticized former President Obama for payments to Iran. Isn't that basically the same thing?
— I repeat: everything that is happening now is actually a step back. The Obama administration provided Iran with $1.7 billion as part of the nuclear agreement, but these were assets that existed before the severance of diplomatic relations in 1979, after the Iranian Revolution. The agreement provided for the return of these assets. This time we are talking about 300 billion dollars, which is a completely different scale. More importantly, these funds can be provided before Iran abandons its nuclear program.
Yes, the funding will not be provided directly by the US government. Investments will come from private companies in America and neighboring Persian Gulf countries, so some might say that a direct comparison is irrelevant. However, the fact is that the new agreement will provide Iran with much more economic benefits than ever.
— Investments of this scale can dramatically change the Iranian economy.
— The Trump administration probably expects that if Iran's economic situation improves, it will become less hostile towards the United States, Israel and neighboring countries.
What about the prospects of opening the Strait of Hormuz?
— What do you think are the prospects for reopening the Strait of Hormuz, and when will this happen?
The memorandum of Understanding provides for the lifting of the US-Iran bilateral blockade within 30 days. The latter undertakes to mine and eliminate its own shells stationed in the Strait. Thus, in 30 days, the Strait of Hormuz should return to the state it was in before February 28. However, the passage will only be open for 60 days. After that, it is planned to transfer the Hormuz to a management system acceptable to Iran, Oman and neighboring countries. It is likely that the Islamic Republic will start charging transit fees — this possibility cannot be ruled out.
— This time, US Vice President J. D. Vance often flashed in the diplomatic arena.
— J.D. Vance behaved uncharacteristically for the Trump administration — initially he opposed the attack on Iran. Donald Trump understood this perfectly well, and therefore appointed Vance as the head of the ceasefire negotiations. It was a signal to the Iranian leadership.: The United States wants to end the conflict quickly. J.D. Vance himself intends to run for president in 2028. It is not yet known whether US Secretary of State Marco Rubio will compete with him, but one thing is clear: the successful achievement of a ceasefire agreement with Iran will significantly increase the chances of Jay D. Vance in this field. I believe this is one of the reasons why Donald Trump appointed the vice president as the chief negotiator.
One more punch and that's it. Russia is erasing what NATO has been building for years
— Well, a scapegoat has already been appointed — in case something goes wrong.
"That's right. Negotiations are about to begin. If it suddenly turns out that Iran does not intend to abandon its nuclear program or open the Strait of Hormuz, it will be a serious blow. All the dogs will be unleashed on J.D. Vance. I think it was all calculated.
