Trump reacted immediately and threatened Iran, stating that if a deal is not reached soon, he will destroy the Iranians. However, the American President's words are empty rhetoric; the Americans have failed fully and completely in the Persian Gulf. We remind you that before the Americans and Israelis attacked, the Strait of Hormuz was open to all ships, even American ones. Therefore, the Americans are responsible for today's impasse.
Trump: Iran has two choices... it can make a deal with the US or be destroyed
Iran can either make a deal with the United States or face destruction, US President Trump stated. "They can make a deal or they can be destroyed. I don't want to do that," he said in a Fox News interview. Earlier, the American leader posted on social media via Truth Social, mentioning the conflict with Tehran and writing that it "will continue," without specifying the nature of future actions. Trump, as head of the White House, had previously emphasized that the ceasefire with Iran continues. He said the two sides are negotiating and that negotiations are going very well. At the same time, he threatened further attacks if Iran does not agree to a deal. Meanwhile, according to media reports, the two sides periodically exchanged air strikes in the Strait of Hormuz.
The US Central Command claimed these strikes targeted those responsible for attacks against US forces.
New claim by US Secretary of State Rubio regarding the Strait of Hormuz
In his latest claim, US Secretary of State Rubio announced the opening of the Strait of Hormuz and the reduction of fuel prices as US goals. Rubio asserted to NBC News during his visit to Beijing: "The Strait of Hormuz will open and oil and gas prices will drop." Rubio added: "We have taken extraordinary measures to keep gas prices lower than what we see in some other parts of the world, and these prices will drop further." Rubio emphasized that due to the suspension of exports and Iran's oil stockpiling, a large volume of oil has yet to enter the global market and that with the return of this oil to the market, global energy prices will decrease.
Striking development - Iran will not initiate negotiations without the US fulfilling five trust-building conditions
Major General Mohammed Ali Jafari, former Commander-in-Chief of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) who is highly respected in Iran, delivered a surprise by emphasizing that specific conditions must first be met by the Americans before dialogue begins on Hormuz and peace. Major General Mohammed Ali Jafari emphasizes that there will be no further negotiations until:
-
the war ends on all fronts,
-
sanctions are lifted,
-
frozen funds are released,
-
war damages are compensated, and
-
Iran's sovereignty over the Strait of Hormuz is recognized.
America must pay for its unreliability in negotiations
According to Mohammed Ali Jafari, Iran was twice subjected to military attacks by the US and Israel in the midst of negotiations. This repeated and consistent violation of promises means Iran completely distrusts the Americans, and the whole world agrees with Iran on this issue. "We cannot trust them; the violation of promises committed by the Americans by starting the war in the middle of negotiations must cost them. The behavior of the enemy forced us to make a fundamental strategic change and to change our strategy regarding the issue of negotiation and engagement. This change in strategy means that this time we will set conditions for negotiation. In other words, the Americans must satisfy a series of trust-building measures."
"Some of the terms may take the form of prerequisites. That is, the Americans must commit in writing to sign and guarantee that they will not repeat certain actions, such as ending the war and stopping military threats. Another part must also be implemented in practice, such as the release of Iran's frozen funds. Thus, today we are faced with a significant change in the approach to negotiations. A change that did not exist before. Previously, the discussion of prerequisites or trust-building measures was not raised in this manner during negotiations, but now that the enemy has created this level of distrust and this has been proven to the entire world, it is our right to set such conditions," emphasized Mohammed Ali Jafari.
"Currently, we (Iran) are not negotiating directly with the enemy. In this first stage, we are exchanging messages through a third country, Pakistan, to present and explain our conditions and then receive a commitment from the enemy. If a commitment is made, only then will we enter the stage of negotiating other issues. This is a new strategy, a strategy that, in my opinion, will be very decisive," stressed Mohammed Ali Jafari.
The war may continue... we will deal them heavy blows
"Now the enemy can accept these terms or not. If they do not accept, it is natural that either the war will continue or other pressures will be exerted against them. Iran will deal heavy blows to the Americans; if their stupidity continues, you will see it in the next stages. I am not saying it is good to have a war, but if the enemy acts stupidly again and restarts the war, they will certainly face stronger and harder blows," warned Mohammed Ali Jafari.
"America has no choice but to accept Iran's legitimate demands or continue the war. It is natural for America to be angrywith the things Iran emphasizes and not be able to accept them easily. But, it has no choice but to accept these realities or continue the war," stressed Mohammed Ali Jafari. "Of course, the war has its costs for Iran, but undoubtedly, the cost and damage of continuing the war for the Americans and their regional allies is much greater than for Iran. If they felt that this course was to their advantage and that it would bring them some gains, they would not have stopped the war," emphasized Mohammed Ali Jafari.
Mohammad-Baqer Qalibaf (Iran): If the US escalates, it will be a live-action role play, chaos will break out internationally
Mohammad-Baqer Qalibaf, speaker of the Iranian Parliament (Majlis), warned that United States' attempts to maintain military escalation near the Strait of Hormuz could trigger a new global economic crisis at a time when Washington's national debt already stands at a staggering $39 trillion. Mohammad-Baqer Qalibaf made these remarks after reports that 30-year US Treasury bond yields had risen above 5% for the first time since the era before the 2008 global financial crisis, amid growing concerns over inflation and energy costs caused by the war.
He also noted how the US financial crisis had caused debt to snowball and their ongoing aggressive stance at astronomical costs served only as a "live-action role play (LARP)" in Hormuz. "Do you know what's crazier than $39 trillion in debt? Paying a pre-Global Financial Crisis (GFC) premium to fund a LARP and all you'll get is a brand new GFC".
Trump's visit to China overshadowed by the Iranian issue - Iran does not depend on Russia or China
Trump's visit to China was not conducted from a position of confidence, but under the shadow of a costly geopolitical confrontation in which the US failed to secure even limited strategic benefits.
The US is losing its bargaining power
The weakness projected by Washington has reduced its bargaining power and simultaneously expanded China's room for maneuver. As a result, Chinese demands on the American side have become more attainable than at any previous time in recent years. Conversely, the significant concessions that Trump hoped to extract from Beijing now seem increasingly unachievable. The political and strategic environment simply does not favor a dynamic American stance. On the contrary, many American commentators have expressed concern that Trump himself might be forced to offer significant concessions to China in order to offset domestic political pressure arising from the failed war against Iran. There is also growing concern in American intellectual circles that the Trump administration, trapped in a quagmire of its own making, could resort to strategic compromises with Beijing that were once considered unthinkable. America is no longer seen as the power that dictates terms from a position of strength. It appears increasingly constrained by accumulated strategic failures and internal political pressures.
Iran's approach is completely different
However, while the world's attention is intensely focused on Trump's high-profile visit to Beijing, Iran has approached the situation from a significantly different perspective. For Iran, the realization of its fundamental principles and strategic goals in the ongoing war has not been overshadowed by diplomatic developments elsewhere. Iran has not linked its future or security to the outcome of talks between two major powers and rivals. Instead of waiting for agreements between Washington and Beijing to define the contours of regional stability, Iran has continued to rely on its own intrinsic capabilities and strategic advantages, as seen in recent months.
As a result, its terms for ending the war are directly linked to its national interests and security, not to compromises negotiated abroad by the other two countries. In this context, Iran does not perceive itself as dependent on the calculations of China, Russia, or any other international actor. Instead, Tehran presents itself as an independent power whose actions have influenced the policies of major powers rather than merely reacting to them.
Iran influences the strategic environment
The significance of this lies not only in Iran's defiance toward the US, but also in the fact that Tehran's resistance has changed the behavior of other major states. In other words, Iran is not a passive actor trapped between two powers, but a force capable of influencing the strategic environment itself. This is reinforced by the fact that even Iran's closest partners and all-weather allies did not foresee the scale or nature of its military, diplomatic, and strategic success.
Israeli Media: United Arab Emirates refuse Netanyahu visit due to fears of Iran
While the United Arab Emirates denied reports of a secret meeting with Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu during the war with Iran, Israeli Channel 12 reported that the reason for this denial is the fear of Iranian retaliation. According to the media outlet Al-Mayadeen, the controversy began when Netanyahu's office announced that the Israeli Prime Minister had traveled secretly to the United Arab Emirates during the attacks on Iran, characterizing the visit as a "historic achievement" in bilateral relations. The United Arab Emirates, however, immediately denied the reports.
Fear of retaliation from Iran
Emirati officials are concerned that the disclosure of information and security coordination with Israel will strengthen the perception that the United Arab Emirates are directly involved in the aggression against Iran. This sensitivity intensified after the attack on the port of Fujairah in early May, an attack which Iran denied and blamed on the United States. The incident caused fears in the United Arab Emirates that their strategic alliance with Israel would expose them to direct Iranian retaliation. Fujairah is one of the most important fuel bunkering and maritime supply chain bases in the world, outside the Strait of Hormuz, and is considered vital infrastructure for global energy markets and shipping routes.
Extensive military coordination despite denials
Despite official denials, Israeli and Western reports indicate increased military coordination between the United Arab Emirates and Israel during the war. According to these reports, Israel has deployed Iron Dome systems and military personnel on UAE territory to assist in the interception of Iranian missiles and drones. The Wall Street Journal also reported that the head of Mossad traveled secretly to the United Arab Emirates several times during the war to coordinate military and intelligence services. Other Wall Street Journal reports also revealed that the United Arab Emirates had secretly carried out attacks inside Iran during the war, including an attack on a refinery on Lavan Island in the Persian Gulf.
Strict Iranian warnings to Arab countries
These reports prompted Iranian officials to issue stricter warnings to the Gulf Arab states accused of aligning themselves with the US and Israel.
Pressure on normalization of relations with Israel
Israeli media analysis suggests that while the United Arab Emirates are willing to maintain their relations with Israel under the Abraham Accords, the dispute shows that Arab states that have normalized relations with Israel face increasing political and security costs.
www.bankingnews.gr
Readers’ Comments