Video wird geladen...

Video konnte nicht geladen werden

Zur Startseite

My interview CNN International Despite the significant damage inflicted on Iran's nuclear program, it has not been eliminated. Tehran retains important elements of its nuclear capability, and the current absence of IAEA inspectors combined with satellite imagery that appears to show renewed activity at sites such as Mount the...

citrinowicz's profile picture

Danny (Dennis) Citrinowicz ,داني سيترينوفيتش

77,780 subscribers

16,171 Aufrufe • vor 2 Monaten •via X (Twitter)

Wissenschaft & TechnologieNachrichten & Politik
LIVE

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

0 Kommentare

Keine Kommentare verfügbar

Kommentare vom Original-Post werden hier angezeigt

Ähnliche Videos

BIG | 🇺🇸🇮🇷‼️‼️ Iran is refusing to trade concessions on its nuclear program for reopening the Strait of Hormuz, signaling that even a potential U.S. acceptance of Tehran’s conditions for the waterway would not resolve the broader confrontation. A senior Iranian official told Reuters that Tehran will not compromise on its nuclear program even if Washington accepts Iran’s proposal concerning the Strait of Hormuz. The official added that the strategic waterway will remain closed until “all of Iran’s conditions are met.” Tehran is effectively separating the Hormuz dispute from the nuclear negotiations rather than treating one as leverage to settle the other. That leaves Washington facing two major disputes that would each require resolution, significantly complicating any attempt to reach a broader agreement with Iran. See the latest updates with us: Visioner
0:30

BIG | 🇺🇸🇮🇷‼️‼️ Iran is refusing to trade concessions on its nuclear program for reopening the Strait of Hormuz, signaling that even a potential U.S. acceptance of Tehran’s conditions for the waterway would not resolve the broader confrontation. A senior Iranian official told Reuters that Tehran will not compromise on its nuclear program even if Washington accepts Iran’s proposal concerning the Strait of Hormuz. The official added that the strategic waterway will remain closed until “all of Iran’s conditions are met.” Tehran is effectively separating the Hormuz dispute from the nuclear negotiations rather than treating one as leverage to settle the other. That leaves Washington facing two major disputes that would each require resolution, significantly complicating any attempt to reach a broader agreement with Iran. See the latest updates with us: Visioner

Visioner

21,027 Aufrufe • vor 2 Tagen

My interview with Jim Sciutto CNN International: A. The fundamental question is: What is the administration’s endgame with Iran? Right now, that remains unclear. Is the objective to weaken Iran, bring down the regime, force Tehran to capitulate, or ultimately return to negotiations and reach an agreement? These are very different objectives that require very different strategies. Until Washington defines what success actually looks like, it is difficult to understand where this conflict is heading or how it is supposed to end. B. Economic pressure is a tool, not an objective, and certainly not an exit strategy. Without a realistic diplomatic off-ramp, maximum economic pressure is more likely to produce escalation than capitulation. The assumption that Washington can continue squeezing Tehran while indefinitely preserving the current status quo is simply unrealistic. Iran has agency in this conflict. Tehran will look for ways to impose costs on the United States and its regional partners. So even if the administration wants to freeze the conflict at its current level, Iran has no reason to accommodate that preference. Washington does not control the escalation ladder by itself. C. Meanwhile, much of the discussion in Washington is focused on the Strait of Hormu which, we should remember, was open before the war, while the strategic problems that helped produce this conflict remain unresolved. The most important is Iran’s nuclear program. In fact, the nuclear challenge may now be more dangerous than it was before the war. Ali Khamenei was deeply hostile to the United States and Israel, but he was also extremely cautious about crossing the nuclear threshold. His removal has changed the decision-making environment in Tehran. With the IRGC now wielding greater influence, the possibility that Iran could decide to move toward a nuclear weapon has become more serious. cannot build a strategy around the assumption that the Iranian regime will collapse. That is not a strategy; it is wishful thinking. Economic pressure, even severe economic pressure, does not guarantee regime change. In fact, it could produce the opposite effect: triggering a nationalist backlash, strengthening the regime’s narrative that Iran is under external attack, and giving the leadership additional justification to crack down internally. Regime change may happen, but Washington cannot make it the central assumption on which its Iran strategy rests. U.S. policy has to be built around the Iran that exists today, not the Iran Washington hopes might emerge tomorrow. E. For the nuclear thtrat - That creates an enormous problem for Israel. It is difficult to imagine any Israeli government simply accepting an Iranian nuclear program moving toward weaponization. So ending the current fighting without addressing the nuclear issue would not resolve the underlying conflict. It could leave Washington and Jerusalem facing an even more dangerous crisis down the road. #IranWar‌ #iran #thebrief
5:35

My interview with Jim Sciutto CNN International: A. The fundamental question is: What is the administration’s endgame with Iran? Right now, that remains unclear. Is the objective to weaken Iran, bring down the regime, force Tehran to capitulate, or ultimately return to negotiations and reach an agreement? These are very different objectives that require very different strategies. Until Washington defines what success actually looks like, it is difficult to understand where this conflict is heading or how it is supposed to end. B. Economic pressure is a tool, not an objective, and certainly not an exit strategy. Without a realistic diplomatic off-ramp, maximum economic pressure is more likely to produce escalation than capitulation. The assumption that Washington can continue squeezing Tehran while indefinitely preserving the current status quo is simply unrealistic. Iran has agency in this conflict. Tehran will look for ways to impose costs on the United States and its regional partners. So even if the administration wants to freeze the conflict at its current level, Iran has no reason to accommodate that preference. Washington does not control the escalation ladder by itself. C. Meanwhile, much of the discussion in Washington is focused on the Strait of Hormu which, we should remember, was open before the war, while the strategic problems that helped produce this conflict remain unresolved. The most important is Iran’s nuclear program. In fact, the nuclear challenge may now be more dangerous than it was before the war. Ali Khamenei was deeply hostile to the United States and Israel, but he was also extremely cautious about crossing the nuclear threshold. His removal has changed the decision-making environment in Tehran. With the IRGC now wielding greater influence, the possibility that Iran could decide to move toward a nuclear weapon has become more serious. cannot build a strategy around the assumption that the Iranian regime will collapse. That is not a strategy; it is wishful thinking. Economic pressure, even severe economic pressure, does not guarantee regime change. In fact, it could produce the opposite effect: triggering a nationalist backlash, strengthening the regime’s narrative that Iran is under external attack, and giving the leadership additional justification to crack down internally. Regime change may happen, but Washington cannot make it the central assumption on which its Iran strategy rests. U.S. policy has to be built around the Iran that exists today, not the Iran Washington hopes might emerge tomorrow. E. For the nuclear thtrat - That creates an enormous problem for Israel. It is difficult to imagine any Israeli government simply accepting an Iranian nuclear program moving toward weaponization. So ending the current fighting without addressing the nuclear issue would not resolve the underlying conflict. It could leave Washington and Jerusalem facing an even more dangerous crisis down the road. #IranWar‌ #iran #thebrief

Danny (Dennis) Citrinowicz ,داني سيترينوفيتش

15,414 Aufrufe • vor 23 Tagen

My interview CNN International with Rosemary Church: A. With all due respect to the emerging Iran-Oman agreement, the key question is not what Tehran and Muscat agree on. The real question is whether the Trump administration is prepared to accept the arrangement. B. The Strait of Hormuz is unlikely to fully reopen unless Washington accepts a framework that gives Iran at least some role, and therefore some degree of leverage, over what happens in the Strait. That may be uncomfortable for the United States, but it is increasingly the strategic reality it has to confront. C. If Washington rejects the emerging arrangement, the risk of escalation will rise significantly. Iranian officials have made clear that Tehran will not indefinitely accept a situation in which other Gulf producers continue exporting oil while Iranian exports remain constrained. Iran may be under considerable economic pressure, but that does not mean it will simply absorb that pressure without responding. D. Oil prices are currently benefiting in part from American signals that Washington does not want to return to a major military confrontation. But avoiding war is not a unilateral decision. It takes two sides to prevent escalation. If the United States rejects the diplomatic framework being developed by Oman and Iran, Washington could still find itself drawn back into a confrontation it clearly prefers to avoid. E. That is also why the recent regional diplomatic activity matters, including the visits by Pakistan's military leadership and the Qatari prime minister. Regional actors understand how unstable the current situation is and are trying to bridge the gap between Washington and Tehran before the escalation cycle resumes. F. On the nuclear issue, Iran is using the return of international inspectors as leverage against both Washington and Israel. For that reason, I would be very surprised to see meaningful IAEA access restored before Tehran receives significant sanctions relief from the United States. G. Until then, the United States and Israel will have to rely heavily on their own intelligence capabilities to understand what is happening at Iran's nuclear sites. And that matters because there are indications of activity at some of these locations, including developments around the so-called Pickaxe Mountain site. The longer inspectors remain outside Iran, the greater the uncertainty surrounding the actual status and direction of the Iranian nuclear program. #IranWar‌
6:22

My interview CNN International with Rosemary Church: A. With all due respect to the emerging Iran-Oman agreement, the key question is not what Tehran and Muscat agree on. The real question is whether the Trump administration is prepared to accept the arrangement. B. The Strait of Hormuz is unlikely to fully reopen unless Washington accepts a framework that gives Iran at least some role, and therefore some degree of leverage, over what happens in the Strait. That may be uncomfortable for the United States, but it is increasingly the strategic reality it has to confront. C. If Washington rejects the emerging arrangement, the risk of escalation will rise significantly. Iranian officials have made clear that Tehran will not indefinitely accept a situation in which other Gulf producers continue exporting oil while Iranian exports remain constrained. Iran may be under considerable economic pressure, but that does not mean it will simply absorb that pressure without responding. D. Oil prices are currently benefiting in part from American signals that Washington does not want to return to a major military confrontation. But avoiding war is not a unilateral decision. It takes two sides to prevent escalation. If the United States rejects the diplomatic framework being developed by Oman and Iran, Washington could still find itself drawn back into a confrontation it clearly prefers to avoid. E. That is also why the recent regional diplomatic activity matters, including the visits by Pakistan's military leadership and the Qatari prime minister. Regional actors understand how unstable the current situation is and are trying to bridge the gap between Washington and Tehran before the escalation cycle resumes. F. On the nuclear issue, Iran is using the return of international inspectors as leverage against both Washington and Israel. For that reason, I would be very surprised to see meaningful IAEA access restored before Tehran receives significant sanctions relief from the United States. G. Until then, the United States and Israel will have to rely heavily on their own intelligence capabilities to understand what is happening at Iran's nuclear sites. And that matters because there are indications of activity at some of these locations, including developments around the so-called Pickaxe Mountain site. The longer inspectors remain outside Iran, the greater the uncertainty surrounding the actual status and direction of the Iranian nuclear program. #IranWar‌

Danny (Dennis) Citrinowicz ,داني سيترينوفيتش

22,618 Aufrufe • vor 1 Monat

President Trump warned "all hell will rain down" on Iran if the country decides to pursue nuclear weapons as both countries agreed to an initial deal to end the war. "The only thing that really matters to me is Iran will never have a nuclear weapon," Trump said on Tuesday at the G7 summit in France. The deal is expected to extend the U.S.-Iran ceasefire, reopen the Strait of Hormuz, end a U.S. naval blockade on Iranian ports and launch negotiations on Iran's nuclear program.
1:16

President Trump warned "all hell will rain down" on Iran if the country decides to pursue nuclear weapons as both countries agreed to an initial deal to end the war. "The only thing that really matters to me is Iran will never have a nuclear weapon," Trump said on Tuesday at the G7 summit in France. The deal is expected to extend the U.S.-Iran ceasefire, reopen the Strait of Hormuz, end a U.S. naval blockade on Iranian ports and launch negotiations on Iran's nuclear program.

CBS News

41,468 Aufrufe • vor 3 Monaten

🇺🇸 U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio said Washington remains open to negotiations with Iran but insisted any agreement must rule out what he called Iranian transit charges in the Strait of Hormuz and guarantee that Iran never acquires a nuclear weapon. 🔸 Speaking at the GCC-US ministerial meeting in Manama, Bahrain, Rubio said the U.S. wants a deal that is “real, verifiable, and adhered to,” adding that Washington hopes Iran chooses to act as “a nation state that focuses on the well-being of their own people” rather than “a revolutionary movement.” 🔸 Rubio rejected any future arrangement that would require ships to pay to transit the Strait of Hormuz, calling it “unacceptable.” 🔸 “No country on Earth has a right to charge for the use of international waterways,” Rubio said. “You can call it a toll, you can call it a fee, whatever you want to call it, it’s a game of semantics.” 🔸 Rubio also reiterated that any agreement with Iran must include verifiable guarantees that Iran “will never have a nuclear weapon.”
3:12

🇺🇸 U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio said Washington remains open to negotiations with Iran but insisted any agreement must rule out what he called Iranian transit charges in the Strait of Hormuz and guarantee that Iran never acquires a nuclear weapon. 🔸 Speaking at the GCC-US ministerial meeting in Manama, Bahrain, Rubio said the U.S. wants a deal that is “real, verifiable, and adhered to,” adding that Washington hopes Iran chooses to act as “a nation state that focuses on the well-being of their own people” rather than “a revolutionary movement.” 🔸 Rubio rejected any future arrangement that would require ships to pay to transit the Strait of Hormuz, calling it “unacceptable.” 🔸 “No country on Earth has a right to charge for the use of international waterways,” Rubio said. “You can call it a toll, you can call it a fee, whatever you want to call it, it’s a game of semantics.” 🔸 Rubio also reiterated that any agreement with Iran must include verifiable guarantees that Iran “will never have a nuclear weapon.”

Drop Site

29,314 Aufrufe • vor 3 Monaten

My interview, Becky Anderson CNN International - I argued that the central problem in current U.S.-Iran relations is the absence of a clear American strategic vision regarding the future of the relationship. What we are seeing instead is a pattern of strategic improvisation that reflects deep uncertainty within the administration about which course of action to pursue. The administration may still be able to secure two important objectives simultaneously: keeping the Strait of Hormuz open and imposing limits on Iran’s nuclear program — but only if Washington is ultimately prepared to accept some version of the Iranian negotiating framework. Even then, there is very little evidence to suggest that Tehran is prepared to wave a white flag or fundamentally surrender to american pressure. From Israel’s perspective, which remains highly dependent on President Trump’s decisions and broader U.S. policy, a flawed agreement may ultimately be viewed as more dangerous than the absence of an agreement altogether. #IranWar‌
8:06

My interview, Becky Anderson CNN International - I argued that the central problem in current U.S.-Iran relations is the absence of a clear American strategic vision regarding the future of the relationship. What we are seeing instead is a pattern of strategic improvisation that reflects deep uncertainty within the administration about which course of action to pursue. The administration may still be able to secure two important objectives simultaneously: keeping the Strait of Hormuz open and imposing limits on Iran’s nuclear program — but only if Washington is ultimately prepared to accept some version of the Iranian negotiating framework. Even then, there is very little evidence to suggest that Tehran is prepared to wave a white flag or fundamentally surrender to american pressure. From Israel’s perspective, which remains highly dependent on President Trump’s decisions and broader U.S. policy, a flawed agreement may ultimately be viewed as more dangerous than the absence of an agreement altogether. #IranWar‌

Danny (Dennis) Citrinowicz ,داني سيترينوفيتش

10,697 Aufrufe • vor 4 Monaten

Iran’s Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi: The winner of this war is the Islamic Republic of Iran, which has emerged stronger from this war. A Memorandum of Understanding with the U.S. has yet to be signed, changes are still possible. The agreement consists of two stages. The nuclear issue was not discussed in the first stage and we deferred it to the second stage. If the provisions of the MoU are not met, the final agreement will not be signed. The first thing mentioned in the agreement is that the US naval blockade be lifted. We will never leave Hezbollah in Lebanon alone, and the end of the war in Lebanon will include all fronts. The Strait of Hormuz is under the sovereignty of Iran and Oman. The future of the Strait of Hormuz will not be like the past, and our sword will always hang over the Strait. Iran and Oman will soon issue a joint statement on the management of the Strait of Hormuz. According to international law, it is not possible to collect tolls from the Strait of Hormuz, but service fees will be collected. Paying compensation to Iran is in plan.
1:41

Iran’s Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi: The winner of this war is the Islamic Republic of Iran, which has emerged stronger from this war. A Memorandum of Understanding with the U.S. has yet to be signed, changes are still possible. The agreement consists of two stages. The nuclear issue was not discussed in the first stage and we deferred it to the second stage. If the provisions of the MoU are not met, the final agreement will not be signed. The first thing mentioned in the agreement is that the US naval blockade be lifted. We will never leave Hezbollah in Lebanon alone, and the end of the war in Lebanon will include all fronts. The Strait of Hormuz is under the sovereignty of Iran and Oman. The future of the Strait of Hormuz will not be like the past, and our sword will always hang over the Strait. Iran and Oman will soon issue a joint statement on the management of the Strait of Hormuz. According to international law, it is not possible to collect tolls from the Strait of Hormuz, but service fees will be collected. Paying compensation to Iran is in plan.

Ariel Oseran أريئل أوسيران

134,043 Aufrufe • vor 3 Monaten

My interview CNN International with Ben Hunte A. Netanyahu’s speech — the bigger problem happened before he spoke The most important moment surrounding Netanyahu’s speech actually happened before he began speaking: a significant number of delegations walked out. That illustrates a broader strategic problem for Israel. Iran is an immediate security challenge, but Israel is also facing a serious erosion of its international standing. Whatever government comes next will have to invest significant political capital in rebuilding Israel’s relationships with the international community. B. Israel’s wars with Iran have not achieved their broader strategic objectives If we measure these conflicts against the objectives Israel itself sought to achieve, the record is deeply problematic. Israel has not brought down the Iranian regime. It has not permanently eliminated Iran’s nuclear capabilities. It has not eliminated Iran’s conventional military capabilities, nor has it ended Tehran’s support for its partners and proxies across the Middle East. What we are seeing today with the Houthis in Yemen is one reminder that Iran’s regional network remains a significant challenge. Tactical and operational achievements should not be confused with achieving the broader strategic objectives of the war. C. The nuclear problem has changed — it has not disappeared There is an important achievement here: Iran is not currently enriching uranium. But the nuclear challenge has not disappeared. The more difficult long-term question is Iran’s motivation. If the confrontation has increased Tehran’s determination to eventually acquire a nuclear weapon, then Israel and the United States may have delayed one dimension of the problem while making another dimension more difficult. Capabilities can be destroyed and rebuilt. Motivation is much harder to eliminate. D. Israel and the Gulf states do not necessarily want the same thing from negotiations Israel is fundamentally skeptical of any agreement that strengthens and stabilizes the same Iranian regime that it would ultimately like to see weakened or replaced. The Strait of Hormuz obviously matters less to Israel, but it matters more to the Gulf states. Their priority is regional stability and avoiding another major confrontation. Reopening and stabilizing Hormuz could also serve the Trump administration if its objective is to reduce pressure on global oil prices. So there is a potential divergence of interests: Washington and the Gulf states may see value in an agreement that produces economic and regional stability, while Israel may worry that the same agreement gives the Iranian regime economic breathing room and ultimately strengthens it. E. Iran’s new proposal does not represent a fundamental change in Tehran’s position The latest Iranian proposal should not be interpreted as Tehran abandoning its core red lines. Iran appears to recognize that President Trump is under increasing political pressure as the midterm elections approach, particularly when it comes to energy prices. Tehran is therefore offering Trump something he has a political incentive to want. But substantively, Iran is still trying to return to a framework resembling the previous memorandum of understanding, an arrangement Tehran believes serves its interests. F. No agreement does not mean continuation of the status quo This may be the most important point for Washington. The current situation is inherently unstable. The United States is applying enormous economic pressure, but Iran has not capitulated. If negotiations fail, we should not automatically assume that the existing situation simply continues. The opposite may be true: the probability of another escalation could increase. That means Washington needs to answer two questions simultaneously: What are the costs of accepting an agreement with Iran and what is the strategy if it rejects one? Because if Tehran concludes that economic pressure will continue indefinitely and diplomacy offers no viable exit, the next Iranian move may not be another negotiating proposal. It may be an attempt to change the equation through escalation. #IranWar‌ #iran
5:39

My interview CNN International with Ben Hunte A. Netanyahu’s speech — the bigger problem happened before he spoke The most important moment surrounding Netanyahu’s speech actually happened before he began speaking: a significant number of delegations walked out. That illustrates a broader strategic problem for Israel. Iran is an immediate security challenge, but Israel is also facing a serious erosion of its international standing. Whatever government comes next will have to invest significant political capital in rebuilding Israel’s relationships with the international community. B. Israel’s wars with Iran have not achieved their broader strategic objectives If we measure these conflicts against the objectives Israel itself sought to achieve, the record is deeply problematic. Israel has not brought down the Iranian regime. It has not permanently eliminated Iran’s nuclear capabilities. It has not eliminated Iran’s conventional military capabilities, nor has it ended Tehran’s support for its partners and proxies across the Middle East. What we are seeing today with the Houthis in Yemen is one reminder that Iran’s regional network remains a significant challenge. Tactical and operational achievements should not be confused with achieving the broader strategic objectives of the war. C. The nuclear problem has changed — it has not disappeared There is an important achievement here: Iran is not currently enriching uranium. But the nuclear challenge has not disappeared. The more difficult long-term question is Iran’s motivation. If the confrontation has increased Tehran’s determination to eventually acquire a nuclear weapon, then Israel and the United States may have delayed one dimension of the problem while making another dimension more difficult. Capabilities can be destroyed and rebuilt. Motivation is much harder to eliminate. D. Israel and the Gulf states do not necessarily want the same thing from negotiations Israel is fundamentally skeptical of any agreement that strengthens and stabilizes the same Iranian regime that it would ultimately like to see weakened or replaced. The Strait of Hormuz obviously matters less to Israel, but it matters more to the Gulf states. Their priority is regional stability and avoiding another major confrontation. Reopening and stabilizing Hormuz could also serve the Trump administration if its objective is to reduce pressure on global oil prices. So there is a potential divergence of interests: Washington and the Gulf states may see value in an agreement that produces economic and regional stability, while Israel may worry that the same agreement gives the Iranian regime economic breathing room and ultimately strengthens it. E. Iran’s new proposal does not represent a fundamental change in Tehran’s position The latest Iranian proposal should not be interpreted as Tehran abandoning its core red lines. Iran appears to recognize that President Trump is under increasing political pressure as the midterm elections approach, particularly when it comes to energy prices. Tehran is therefore offering Trump something he has a political incentive to want. But substantively, Iran is still trying to return to a framework resembling the previous memorandum of understanding, an arrangement Tehran believes serves its interests. F. No agreement does not mean continuation of the status quo This may be the most important point for Washington. The current situation is inherently unstable. The United States is applying enormous economic pressure, but Iran has not capitulated. If negotiations fail, we should not automatically assume that the existing situation simply continues. The opposite may be true: the probability of another escalation could increase. That means Washington needs to answer two questions simultaneously: What are the costs of accepting an agreement with Iran and what is the strategy if it rejects one? Because if Tehran concludes that economic pressure will continue indefinitely and diplomacy offers no viable exit, the next Iranian move may not be another negotiating proposal. It may be an attempt to change the equation through escalation. #IranWar‌ #iran

Danny (Dennis) Citrinowicz ,داني سيترينوفيتش

13,277 Aufrufe • vor 2 Tagen

🇮🇷🇺🇸 Iran Responds to U.S. Strikes on Nuclear Sites Iranian Foreign Minister stated that there is still no precise assessment of the damage inflicted on the country’s nuclear infrastructure following recent U.S. attacks. Additional key points from his remarks: 🔸️Trump betrayed his promises of global peace and has fully submitted to the demands of the criminal Zionist regime. 🔸️American aggression now poses a direct threat to global peace and stability, spreading a law-of-the-jungle mentality across the world. 🔸️By targeting Iran’s nuclear sites, Washington has crossed a major red line. 🔸️The Trump administration is threatening further strikes, and the international community must respond to safeguard global security. 🔸️Tehran reserves the right to defend its people, its interests, and its sovereignty by any means necessary. 🔸️It was not Iran that betrayed diplomacy — it was the United States. And the U.S. only understands the language of force. 🔸️Iran remains committed to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), but that treaty offers no protection under current circumstances. 🔸️Iran’s response to this U.S. aggression will not be announced in advance.
0:51

🇮🇷🇺🇸 Iran Responds to U.S. Strikes on Nuclear Sites Iranian Foreign Minister stated that there is still no precise assessment of the damage inflicted on the country’s nuclear infrastructure following recent U.S. attacks. Additional key points from his remarks: 🔸️Trump betrayed his promises of global peace and has fully submitted to the demands of the criminal Zionist regime. 🔸️American aggression now poses a direct threat to global peace and stability, spreading a law-of-the-jungle mentality across the world. 🔸️By targeting Iran’s nuclear sites, Washington has crossed a major red line. 🔸️The Trump administration is threatening further strikes, and the international community must respond to safeguard global security. 🔸️Tehran reserves the right to defend its people, its interests, and its sovereignty by any means necessary. 🔸️It was not Iran that betrayed diplomacy — it was the United States. And the U.S. only understands the language of force. 🔸️Iran remains committed to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), but that treaty offers no protection under current circumstances. 🔸️Iran’s response to this U.S. aggression will not be announced in advance.

DD Geopolitics

80,295 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr

Speaking to Al Mayadeen, Professor Mohammad Marandi asserted that Iran never expected the United States to implement the memorandum of understanding, stressing that the "Iranians have no trust in the #Trump regime." He also added that "Iran knew that the #UnitedStates would drag its feet as much as possible," arguing that it had agreed to electronic signatures without a formal ceremony because of that distrust, adding that Iran's leverage lies in its control of the Strait of Hormuz. Marandi further asserted that "#Iran won the war," and warned that "Iran will continue to use that leverage" until the US fulfills its commitments, saying the future of the agreement depends on whether the US ultimately honors its side of the deal. As for the signed framework agreement between the Lebanese authorities and the Israeli occupation, Professor Marandi said it is an attempt by Washington to violate the US-Iran MoU and an attempt by the US to "undermine the agreement". Seyed Mohammad Marandi #USIranMoU #Lebanon
3:17

Speaking to Al Mayadeen, Professor Mohammad Marandi asserted that Iran never expected the United States to implement the memorandum of understanding, stressing that the "Iranians have no trust in the #Trump regime." He also added that "Iran knew that the #UnitedStates would drag its feet as much as possible," arguing that it had agreed to electronic signatures without a formal ceremony because of that distrust, adding that Iran's leverage lies in its control of the Strait of Hormuz. Marandi further asserted that "#Iran won the war," and warned that "Iran will continue to use that leverage" until the US fulfills its commitments, saying the future of the agreement depends on whether the US ultimately honors its side of the deal. As for the signed framework agreement between the Lebanese authorities and the Israeli occupation, Professor Marandi said it is an attempt by Washington to violate the US-Iran MoU and an attempt by the US to "undermine the agreement". Seyed Mohammad Marandi #USIranMoU #Lebanon

Al Mayadeen English

16,313 Aufrufe • vor 3 Monaten

🇺🇸🇮🇷 The US has reached a deadlock in its attempt to avoid the endless war trap with Iran. Trump is not in a better position than before the war, and Tehran refuses to make concessions. ➡️ The terms of any new agreement remain unclear because the parties hold radically different positions on key issues such as Iran's nuclear program. Trump desperately needs short-term concessions to justify starting a war, but Tehran does not intend to offer them. ➡️ The longer this deadlock continues, the more Americans will feel the inflationary impact caused by the closure of the Strait of Hormuz, which will force Trump to make unpleasant compromises to escape the quagmire he created himself. It is noteworthy that despite today's warming statement from Trump about lifting the blockade of the Strait of Hormuz, Iran has rejected all proposals and refuses to make concessions on enriched uranium and uranium enrichment, also refuses to concede control of the Strait of Hormuz, and calls on the US to first unfreeze the $12 billion blocked for Iran before any agreement. Moreover, it is reported that today's situation room meeting convened by Trump ended without a decision because Iran rejected any concessions in response to Trump.
0:46

🇺🇸🇮🇷 The US has reached a deadlock in its attempt to avoid the endless war trap with Iran. Trump is not in a better position than before the war, and Tehran refuses to make concessions. ➡️ The terms of any new agreement remain unclear because the parties hold radically different positions on key issues such as Iran's nuclear program. Trump desperately needs short-term concessions to justify starting a war, but Tehran does not intend to offer them. ➡️ The longer this deadlock continues, the more Americans will feel the inflationary impact caused by the closure of the Strait of Hormuz, which will force Trump to make unpleasant compromises to escape the quagmire he created himself. It is noteworthy that despite today's warming statement from Trump about lifting the blockade of the Strait of Hormuz, Iran has rejected all proposals and refuses to make concessions on enriched uranium and uranium enrichment, also refuses to concede control of the Strait of Hormuz, and calls on the US to first unfreeze the $12 billion blocked for Iran before any agreement. Moreover, it is reported that today's situation room meeting convened by Trump ended without a decision because Iran rejected any concessions in response to Trump.

Visioner

25,147 Aufrufe • vor 4 Monaten

Military and political analyst Elijah Magnier says the clearest sign the U.S lost the Iran war is that nobody is talking about Tehran's nuclear program anymore; they're fighting over the Strait of Hormuz. America went into this focused on Iran's nuclear program, its ballistic missiles, and regional proxies. Now Trump is arguing about who gets to control Hormuz, and Elijah thinks that tells you everything about how badly the original strategy failed. Iran's missile programme is still operational, its nuclear programme has been pushed into future negotiations, and its regional proxies remain part of Tehran's strategic calculations. Yet Washington's attention is now almost entirely consumed by a source of Iranian leverage that barely existed before the war: Hormuz. Elijah says Iran has effectively pulled off a strategic sleight of hand. For years, the world obsessed over Tehran's nuclear programme while Iran quietly built an enormous missile arsenal. Those missiles eventually gave Iran the ability to absorb American and Israeli attacks and continue retaliating across the region. Now he thinks they're doing it again. Everyone is staring at the Strait of Hormuz. Meanwhile, Iran is rebuilding missiles, maintaining its regional relationships, and buying time on the nuclear issue. Trump even briefly proposed charging ships a 20% fee to pass through the Strait. That lasted barely 24 hours before he replaced it with demands for massive Gulf investment in America. To Elijah, the whole episode exposed something much deeper. Washington says this is about freedom of navigation. But Trump accused Iran of monetizing Hormuz, then immediately tried to monetize it himself. Suddenly, the argument wasn't whether the Strait should be used as leverage; it was who gets to control it and collect the money, and Iran jumped on the contradiction immediately. Elijah's argument is that Trump has trapped himself. He entered the war determined to strip Iran of its leverage, but instead, he's handed Tehran a weapon it didn't have before. Elijah J. Magnier 🇪🇺
51:13

Military and political analyst Elijah Magnier says the clearest sign the U.S lost the Iran war is that nobody is talking about Tehran's nuclear program anymore; they're fighting over the Strait of Hormuz. America went into this focused on Iran's nuclear program, its ballistic missiles, and regional proxies. Now Trump is arguing about who gets to control Hormuz, and Elijah thinks that tells you everything about how badly the original strategy failed. Iran's missile programme is still operational, its nuclear programme has been pushed into future negotiations, and its regional proxies remain part of Tehran's strategic calculations. Yet Washington's attention is now almost entirely consumed by a source of Iranian leverage that barely existed before the war: Hormuz. Elijah says Iran has effectively pulled off a strategic sleight of hand. For years, the world obsessed over Tehran's nuclear programme while Iran quietly built an enormous missile arsenal. Those missiles eventually gave Iran the ability to absorb American and Israeli attacks and continue retaliating across the region. Now he thinks they're doing it again. Everyone is staring at the Strait of Hormuz. Meanwhile, Iran is rebuilding missiles, maintaining its regional relationships, and buying time on the nuclear issue. Trump even briefly proposed charging ships a 20% fee to pass through the Strait. That lasted barely 24 hours before he replaced it with demands for massive Gulf investment in America. To Elijah, the whole episode exposed something much deeper. Washington says this is about freedom of navigation. But Trump accused Iran of monetizing Hormuz, then immediately tried to monetize it himself. Suddenly, the argument wasn't whether the Strait should be used as leverage; it was who gets to control it and collect the money, and Iran jumped on the contradiction immediately. Elijah's argument is that Trump has trapped himself. He entered the war determined to strip Iran of its leverage, but instead, he's handed Tehran a weapon it didn't have before. Elijah J. Magnier 🇪🇺

Mario Nawfal

317,382 Aufrufe • vor 2 Monaten

Iran: There Is No Return to Pre-War Hormuz Spokesman Esmail Baghaei says Iran's talks with OMAN are aimed at a brand-new Strait of Hormuz passage, and that the new route agreement has nothing to do with opening or closing the Strait. "The Iran-Oman agreement on the new route has NOTHING to do with reopening or keeping the Strait of Hormuz closed. These are two SEPARATE issues." The Strait's status stays in Iran's hands.
1:04

Iran: There Is No Return to Pre-War Hormuz Spokesman Esmail Baghaei says Iran's talks with OMAN are aimed at a brand-new Strait of Hormuz passage, and that the new route agreement has nothing to do with opening or closing the Strait. "The Iran-Oman agreement on the new route has NOTHING to do with reopening or keeping the Strait of Hormuz closed. These are two SEPARATE issues." The Strait's status stays in Iran's hands.

Ryan Rozbiani

10,342 Aufrufe • vor 1 Monat

🇮🇱 🇮🇷 Israel may be forced to act alone against Iran: Israel Hayom, a prominent Israeli newspaper often aligned with government views published an article today that was interesting. The article argues that any U.S.-Iran nuclear agreement must explicitly limit Iran's ballistic missile production, stockpiling and capabilities. Failing to take necessary measures would leave Israel vulnerable to an existential threat posed by Iran's missiles, which can transport nuclear warheads if Iran moves forward with its program, regardless of any nuclear constraints. In the event that a new deal fails to address missiles, Israel would be left with no option but to unilaterally attack Iranian missile facilities or related infrastructure to neutralize the threat, even without U.S. assistance. I see it as unlikely that the U.S. and Iran will come to an agreement in the negotiations. I usually don't focus so much on what is conveyed through the media but more on what reinforcements the U.S. is sending to the region. Given that, it is obvious that the U.S. is preparing for war.
0:22

🇮🇱 🇮🇷 Israel may be forced to act alone against Iran: Israel Hayom, a prominent Israeli newspaper often aligned with government views published an article today that was interesting. The article argues that any U.S.-Iran nuclear agreement must explicitly limit Iran's ballistic missile production, stockpiling and capabilities. Failing to take necessary measures would leave Israel vulnerable to an existential threat posed by Iran's missiles, which can transport nuclear warheads if Iran moves forward with its program, regardless of any nuclear constraints. In the event that a new deal fails to address missiles, Israel would be left with no option but to unilaterally attack Iranian missile facilities or related infrastructure to neutralize the threat, even without U.S. assistance. I see it as unlikely that the U.S. and Iran will come to an agreement in the negotiations. I usually don't focus so much on what is conveyed through the media but more on what reinforcements the U.S. is sending to the region. Given that, it is obvious that the U.S. is preparing for war.

WORLD AT WAR

24,074 Aufrufe • vor 7 Monaten

Told Becky Anderson: - Trump has given himself leeway to step back from his threats by saying that Iran must either make a deal OR open Strait of Hormuz. - Iran is ready for a deal on its nuclear program and Hormuz, but not likely to concede on missiles or regional allies. - Iran wants any end to the war to be definitive and also cover its allies in the region. - If Trump goes ahead with attack on Iranian power grid, important to look at the scope. No single plant is responsible for more than few % of total output and Trump may justify attacks on certain regional nodes by charging that they are linked to IRGC sites.
7:23

Told Becky Anderson: - Trump has given himself leeway to step back from his threats by saying that Iran must either make a deal OR open Strait of Hormuz. - Iran is ready for a deal on its nuclear program and Hormuz, but not likely to concede on missiles or regional allies. - Iran wants any end to the war to be definitive and also cover its allies in the region. - If Trump goes ahead with attack on Iranian power grid, important to look at the scope. No single plant is responsible for more than few % of total output and Trump may justify attacks on certain regional nodes by charging that they are linked to IRGC sites.

Mohammad Ali Shabani

22,241 Aufrufe • vor 5 Monaten

My interview CNN International: A. The negotiations were never expected to be easy. However, at a fundamental level, both sides have an interest in reaching some form of agreement. The mediators will have to work very hard to bridge the significant gaps that remain. Still, as President Trump himself acknowledged, diplomacy remains the best available option for reopening the Strait of Hormuz and addressing concerns regarding Iran's enriched uranium stockpile. B. The Lebanese issue remains a major potential spoiler. Israel, which is not a party to any potential agreement, is not necessarily enthusiastic about a deal that could undermine its broader strategy of maintaining maximum pressure on Iran. While Israel continues to conduct operations in Lebanon to address legitimate security concerns, its long-term strategy is not entirely clear. From Israel's perspective, and with encouragement from Washington, the most constructive path forward would be to accelerate negotiations with the Lebanese government, withdraw where possible, and allow the Lebanese Armed Forces to assume control over the relevant areas in accordance with existing understandings. C. Iran may be prepared to offer limited concessions on its nuclear program in exchange for sanctions relief, particularly given the severe economic damage it has suffered following the war. However, if policymakers in Washington believe they can leverage Iran's economic weakness to secure major concessions on its regional power projection, support for proxy groups, or far-reaching additional nuclear restrictions, they are likely to be disappointed. These issues are deeply rooted in the ideological foundations of the Islamic Republic and are viewed by the leadership as core national security interests rather than negotiable bargaining chips.
5:00

My interview CNN International: A. The negotiations were never expected to be easy. However, at a fundamental level, both sides have an interest in reaching some form of agreement. The mediators will have to work very hard to bridge the significant gaps that remain. Still, as President Trump himself acknowledged, diplomacy remains the best available option for reopening the Strait of Hormuz and addressing concerns regarding Iran's enriched uranium stockpile. B. The Lebanese issue remains a major potential spoiler. Israel, which is not a party to any potential agreement, is not necessarily enthusiastic about a deal that could undermine its broader strategy of maintaining maximum pressure on Iran. While Israel continues to conduct operations in Lebanon to address legitimate security concerns, its long-term strategy is not entirely clear. From Israel's perspective, and with encouragement from Washington, the most constructive path forward would be to accelerate negotiations with the Lebanese government, withdraw where possible, and allow the Lebanese Armed Forces to assume control over the relevant areas in accordance with existing understandings. C. Iran may be prepared to offer limited concessions on its nuclear program in exchange for sanctions relief, particularly given the severe economic damage it has suffered following the war. However, if policymakers in Washington believe they can leverage Iran's economic weakness to secure major concessions on its regional power projection, support for proxy groups, or far-reaching additional nuclear restrictions, they are likely to be disappointed. These issues are deeply rooted in the ideological foundations of the Islamic Republic and are viewed by the leadership as core national security interests rather than negotiable bargaining chips.

Danny (Dennis) Citrinowicz ,داني سيترينوفيتش

27,376 Aufrufe • vor 3 Monaten

Mu interview BBC News (World) regarding the situation at Hormuz Straits: The renewed tensions in the Strait of Hormuz should not come as a surprise. While President Trump argues that the United States emerged victorious from the conflict, Tehran appears to believe that it also achieved its core strategic objectives. From Iran's perspective, maintaining leverage in the Strait of Hormuz is essential. Iranian leaders understand that U.S. sanctions can be imposed or lifted at Washington's discretion, making control over or the ability to threaten maritime traffic one of the few enduring sources of strategic leverage available to Tehran. The current situation also reflects the limitations of a hastily negotiated understanding that, did not fully address two of the most significant potential spoilers: Lebanon and the Strait of Hormuz. The fundamental question is what the administration's long-term strategy toward Iran actually is. Washington may ultimately face difficult tradeoffs between pursuing a durable diplomatic agreement and seeking to fundamentally alter the balance of power in the Strait of Hormuz. If the objective is merely to conduct limited punitive strikes, they may have only a temporary effect on Iranian behavior while increasing the risk of undermining diplomacy. If, however, the objective is to fundamentally change the strategic reality in the Strait, that would likely require a far larger and more sustained military commitment, with significant costs and risks. The administration will therefore need to determine which objective it prioritizes most, because these different approaches may not be fully compatible. #IranWar‌
7:11

Mu interview BBC News (World) regarding the situation at Hormuz Straits: The renewed tensions in the Strait of Hormuz should not come as a surprise. While President Trump argues that the United States emerged victorious from the conflict, Tehran appears to believe that it also achieved its core strategic objectives. From Iran's perspective, maintaining leverage in the Strait of Hormuz is essential. Iranian leaders understand that U.S. sanctions can be imposed or lifted at Washington's discretion, making control over or the ability to threaten maritime traffic one of the few enduring sources of strategic leverage available to Tehran. The current situation also reflects the limitations of a hastily negotiated understanding that, did not fully address two of the most significant potential spoilers: Lebanon and the Strait of Hormuz. The fundamental question is what the administration's long-term strategy toward Iran actually is. Washington may ultimately face difficult tradeoffs between pursuing a durable diplomatic agreement and seeking to fundamentally alter the balance of power in the Strait of Hormuz. If the objective is merely to conduct limited punitive strikes, they may have only a temporary effect on Iranian behavior while increasing the risk of undermining diplomacy. If, however, the objective is to fundamentally change the strategic reality in the Strait, that would likely require a far larger and more sustained military commitment, with significant costs and risks. The administration will therefore need to determine which objective it prioritizes most, because these different approaches may not be fully compatible. #IranWar‌

Danny (Dennis) Citrinowicz ,داني سيترينوفيتش

17,349 Aufrufe • vor 2 Monaten

🇺🇸🇮🇷 Trump has barely launched Operation Economic Outcast against Iran, and China is already calling his bluff. Beijing says it will not comply, and is threatening retaliation if Washington targets Chinese companies for continuing to trade with Tehran. That's a HUGE problem for Trump's strategy. Operation Economic Outcast is supposed to sever the international financial lifelines keeping Tehran alive. But Iran cannot be economically isolated if major trading partners simply refuse to participate. Washington can sanction Iran, but the real test has always been whether it is prepared to sanction the powerful countries that keep doing business with it. China has now effectively dared Trump to try. Meanwhile, Iran and Oman have announced a preliminary agreement over managing the Strait of Hormuz. Iran would control incoming maritime traffic and retain the right to impose service fees, while outbound traffic would use the Omani corridor. Crucially, Tehran says the agreement does not mean Hormuz is immediately reopening. Iran says the Strait will remain closed until the U.S naval blockade is lifted and the terms of the broader MOU are honoured. And there are signs Washington may already be moving in that direction. According to an Al Arabiya report, Pakistan's Asim Munir conveyed an American proposal to Tehran: Washington is prepared to lift the naval blockade and sanctions if Iran guarantees free passage through Hormuz and pressures the Houthis to stop attacking Saudi energy infrastructure. There is another important signal. The State Department is reportedly preparing to return diplomats to a string of Middle Eastern embassies evacuated during the war, suggesting Washington does not currently expect large-scale fighting to resume. Put all of this together, and Trump's strategy starts looking very different from the rhetoric; the direction of travel today may actually be toward a deal. Brandon Weichert
43:41

🇺🇸🇮🇷 Trump has barely launched Operation Economic Outcast against Iran, and China is already calling his bluff. Beijing says it will not comply, and is threatening retaliation if Washington targets Chinese companies for continuing to trade with Tehran. That's a HUGE problem for Trump's strategy. Operation Economic Outcast is supposed to sever the international financial lifelines keeping Tehran alive. But Iran cannot be economically isolated if major trading partners simply refuse to participate. Washington can sanction Iran, but the real test has always been whether it is prepared to sanction the powerful countries that keep doing business with it. China has now effectively dared Trump to try. Meanwhile, Iran and Oman have announced a preliminary agreement over managing the Strait of Hormuz. Iran would control incoming maritime traffic and retain the right to impose service fees, while outbound traffic would use the Omani corridor. Crucially, Tehran says the agreement does not mean Hormuz is immediately reopening. Iran says the Strait will remain closed until the U.S naval blockade is lifted and the terms of the broader MOU are honoured. And there are signs Washington may already be moving in that direction. According to an Al Arabiya report, Pakistan's Asim Munir conveyed an American proposal to Tehran: Washington is prepared to lift the naval blockade and sanctions if Iran guarantees free passage through Hormuz and pressures the Houthis to stop attacking Saudi energy infrastructure. There is another important signal. The State Department is reportedly preparing to return diplomats to a string of Middle Eastern embassies evacuated during the war, suggesting Washington does not currently expect large-scale fighting to resume. Put all of this together, and Trump's strategy starts looking very different from the rhetoric; the direction of travel today may actually be toward a deal. Brandon Weichert

Mario Nawfal

279,111 Aufrufe • vor 1 Monat