正在加载视频...

视频加载失败

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...

22,241 次观看 • 4 个月前 •via X (Twitter)

0 条评论

暂无评论

原始帖子的评论将显示在这里

相关视频

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 次观看 • 1 个月前

🇺🇸🇮🇷 Journalist Sharmine Narwani says Trump is trying to claim credit for a Hormuz deal he did not negotiate and may no longer have the power to stop. She argues there is no U.S-Iran deal; Washington and Tehran are not even negotiating directly. The real discussions are taking place between Iran and Oman, with Gulf states increasingly backing a regional solution to a crisis America created but could not control. And that distinction matters. Trump wants to present any reopening of the Strait of Hormuz as another war he personally solved, but Sharmine says the real story is almost the exact opposite. Regional states are no longer waiting for Washington to decide how they engage with their neighbors. They are taking matters into their own hands because leaving their security to the U.S became too dangerous. The emerging Hormuz arrangement is still being negotiated, but one Iranian position appears immovable: The Strait will never return to the system that existed before the war. Iran could retain authority over inbound traffic, oversight of vessels using the Omani route, the power to inspect or block ships it considers hostile, and transit or service fees also remain on the table. Even a final agreement would not mean business as usual, because any renewed attack on Iran could immediately close the Strait again. America may now have to accept an arrangement written by Iran and Oman, supported by Gulf nations and only reluctantly tolerated by Washington. Sharmine argues this reflects something much larger than a dispute over shipping lanes: The old regional order is breaking down. For decades, Washington expected allies and adversaries alike to wait for American approval before making major security decisions. This war changed that calculation, and Iran emerged not isolated or broken, but with greater influence over the diplomatic endgame. Her argument is that the U.S did not merely fail to defeat Iran; it accelerated the rise of the regional power it entered the war to contain. Sharmine Narwani

Mario Nawfal

230,855 次观看 • 17 天前

This is a crucial point on Iran by Chas Freeman, the former US Assistant Secretary of Defense and, relevant to the topic, former US Ambassador to Saudi Arabia (also, incidentally, one of the very rare former senior US officials who's a genuinely thoughtful diplomat as opposed to a sociopathic neocon). What Freeman explains is that Iran's control of Hormuz, which Trump implicitly admitted is beyond the US's ability to contest (by saying in his speech it's not his problem to solve, that "others" should deal with it), will necessarily lead to a reshaping of the regional order in Iran's favor. As Freeman says, "the Gulf Arabs have no alternative but to negotiate with Iran because they cannot survive indefinitely with the Strait of Hormuz closed to their exports." Meanwhile, countries like China, India, Japan, and Turkey have already worked out transit agreements with Tehran - de-facto recognizing Iranian authority over the strait. In effect, Iranian control of Hormuz is now a fait accompli: they control the valve on the single largest concentration of hydrocarbon exports on earth. This is a long-term reality with immense implications. In fact it's such a massive long-term win for Iran that the way the war may ironically be remembered by history is Trump giving Tehran the ideal casus belli to seize control of Hormuz - something the world would have never accepted had they done it unprovoked. It remains to be seen how the war ends - if it ends at all - but this may end up proving even more valuable to Iran than nuclear weapons. For instance, as Freeman points out, one of the conditions Iran set for Hormuz passage is an end to sanctions and hostility toward them. The logical endpoint is the collapse of the entire sanctions regime - Iran trading openly with the world (save, presumably, for the US and Israel), without having to make any guarantees on its nuclear program. In other words Trump tore up the JCPOA calling it "the worst deal in history," and his war may have replaced it with something infinitely more favorable to Tehran. Source for the whole video (worth a watch in its entirety as are all of Freeman's talks):

Arnaud Bertrand

209,823 次观看 • 4 个月前