Trump's TACO Supreme

I am sure that I write a lot of foolish things in these posts, but yesterday I got a couple of things correct. After reviewing possible scenarios that might occur as a result of cult leader, convicted felon, and failed President Donald Trump's threat to destroy Iran's civilization, I concluded "As such, the most likely outcome remains Trump TACOing, perhaps with a fig leaf of negotiations." I also noted that "if the Iranians can achieve their goals through negotiations, Trump could be the ideal mark for them." Both of these observations proved to be right on the money. Yesterday evening, 88 minutes before the expiration of Trump's 8 p.m. deadline for Iran to either make a deal or suffer the destruction of its civilization, Trump posted the following on Truth Social:

Based on conversations with Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif and Field Marshal Asim Munir, of Pakistan, and wherein they requested that I hold off the destructive force being sent tonight to Iran, and subject to the Islamic Republic of Iran agreeing to the COMPLETE, IMMEDIATE, and SAFE OPENING of the Strait of Hormuz, I agree to suspend the bombing and attack of Iran for a period of two weeks. This will be a double sided CEASEFIRE! The reason for doing so is that we have already met and exceeded all Military objectives, and are very far along with a definitive Agreement concerning Longterm PEACE with Iran, and PEACE in the Middle East. We received a 10 point proposal from Iran, and believe it is a workable basis on which to negotiate. Almost all of the various points of past contention have been agreed to between the United States and Iran, but a two week period will allow the Agreement to be finalized and consummated. On behalf of the United States of America, as President, and also representing the Countries of the Middle East, it is an Honor to have this Longterm problem close to resolution. Thank you for your attention to this matter! President DONALD J. TRUMP

Trump is not a skilled writer, and his "truth" leaves a lot to be desired as a diplomatic or legal document. But, making the best of it, we can conclude the following:

1. The request for a ceasefire came from Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif of Pakistan;
2. The ceasefire is contingent upon Iran allowing complete, immediate, and safe opening of the Strait of Hormuz;
3. The ceasefire will last two weeks;
4. Both sides will honor the ceasefire;
5. The U.S. has exceeded its military objectives;
6. The U.S. and Iran are very far along on agreeing to a long-term peace deal;
7. A 10-point proposal provided by Iran will be the basis of negotiations; and
8. An agreement will be completed during the two-week ceasefire.

Throughout yesterday, it was apparent that Trump was desperate to find a way out of the corner into which he had painted himself. His bluster about destroying Iran's civilization had been meant as a bargaining ploy. Unfortunately for him, the Iranian regime was not impressed. Iran has repeatedly rejected ceasefire offers and showed no interest in one through most of yesterday.

The original version of an X post by Prime Minister Sharif requesting the ceasefire contained a line saying, "Draft - Pakistan's PM Message on X". Neither Sharif nor his staff would likely refer to him as "Pakistan's PM," they would just say "PM." Moreover, the first sentence referred to diplomatic efforts as going "strongly and powerfully," the type of language associated with Trump. This created suspicions that Sharif's post was authored by the White House.

There was considerable doubt that Iran had or would agree to completely reopening the Strait of Hormuz. That was their trump card during the conflict. What soon became clear was that "complete, immediate, and safe" are subject to interpretation. The Iranians have contended all along that the strait is open to all but their enemies. However, they have placed conditions on the ships that have been allowed to traverse it. A response to Sharif's tweet by Iran's Minister of Foreign Affairs, Abbas Araghchi, stated that safe passage would be allowed "via coordination with Iran's Armed Forces". This sounded like Iran planned to maintain control of the strait, something that would become even more clear with news that Iran planned to charge a $2 million fee to cross the strait.

As for the ceasefire, observance was mixed at best. Both Iran and Israel continued attacking each other far after the ceasefire was announced. Moreover, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said that the ceasefire would not apply to Lebanon. This was contrary to a ceasefire announcement posted by Sharif that explicitly said that Lebanon was included in the ceasefire. Moreover, the United Arab Emirates launched bombing attacks against Iranian petrochemical installations on the islands of Siri and Lavan in the Persian Gulf. This could further complicate things.

Even casual observers of the war will know that the U.S. has not accomplished its military objectives. Iran still maintains possession of its enriched uranium and still has plenty of missile and drone capacity. While Trump has repeatedly touted the destruction of Iran's navy, today the Wall Street Journal reported that the Iranian Navy was warning ships that they must receive permission in order to cross the strait. This would indicate remaining Iranian naval capacity as well as current restrictions on travel through the strait.

Trump's claim that the U.S. and Iran are "very far along" on a peace deal likely refers to a nearly completed agreement worked out by Trump's Middle East envoy Steve Witkoff and son-in-law Jared Kushner with Iranian representatives prior to the war. That agreement is very close to the nuclear deal that former President Barack Obama agreed to with Iran.

Probably the most astonishing part of Trump's Truth Social post was his concession that Iran's 10-point proposal would be the "basis on which to negotiate". Iran has been offering these ten points even before the fighting started, and the U.S. has consistently rejected them. There are a couple of different versions of the points floating around, but I'll rely on one published by the Wall Street Journal who attributed it to the Iranian publication, Nour News. It is as follows:

1. The U.S. must fundamentally commit to guaranteeing non-aggression.
2. Continuation of Iran’s control over the Strait of Hormuz.
3. Acceptance that Iran can enrich uranium for its nuclear program.
4. Removal of all primary sanctions on Iran.
5. Removal of all secondary sanctions against foreign entities that do business with Iranian institutions.
6. End of all United Security Council resolutions targeting Iran.
7. End of all International Atomic Energy Agency resolutions on Iran’s nuclear program.
8. Compensation payment to Iran for war damage.
9. Withdrawal of U.S. combat forces from the region.
10. Cease-fire on all fronts, including Israel’s conflict with Hezbollah in Lebanon.

It is important to keep in mind that Trump has not agreed to this list. Only that it will be the basis of negotiation. That said, it is very unlikely that the Iranians will back off very far from the list. In theory, the non-aggression guarantee should not be a problem. However, such an agreement may be complicated by other countries in the region such as Israel and, after today's attacks, the UAE.

One would have thought that agreeing to Iran's control of the strait would be a non-starter for Trump. But this morning Trump told ABC's Jonathan Karl that if Iran wanted to charge a toll to pass the strait, maybe the U.S. would enter a joint venture with the country. "It's a beautiful thing," said Trump.

Iran has consistently argued that it should be allowed to enrich uranium to low levels for peaceful research uses. That is probably what is meant by the third point. Presumably, the removal of sanctions and withdrawal of resolutions would be part of a comprehensive peace agreement and, as such, those points are probably not controversial.

The question of compensation could be handled two ways. One would be addressing the issue through the tolls that it appears that Iran will be allowed to collect. The second would be through the return of frozen money (the same thing that Obama did and for which he has been incessantly criticized by Trump). Back on March 21, Axios quoted a U.S. official as saying:

"They call it reparations. Maybe we call it return of frozen money. There's many different ways that we can wordsmith so that it solves politically what they need to solve, to develop consensus in their system," the official said.

The withdrawal of U.S. combat forces would be more complicated, especially if that also referred to U.S. military bases in the region. As for a ceasefire on all fronts, Israel is already resisting that with regard to Lebanon.

Based on the Iranian negotiating points and political realities, it is clear that Trump will face considerable pressure to take a much harder line toward negotiations. The Gulf Arab countries will certainly not want to leave Iran in control of the strait and imposing tolls on their shipping. Israel clearly does not want its hands tied in Lebanon. From a simple, objective point of view, the deal likely to come out of negotiations will almost certainly leave Iran stronger than it was before the war and the U.S. weaker. As such, Trump will also face domestic criticism from both Democrats and some Republicans. Even all-around crazy person and devoted Trump supporter Laura Loomer has criticized the ceasefire. As a result, I just don't see how the ceasefire survives and a deal between the U.S. and Iran will be reached.

Today, Israel launched its biggest attacks on Lebanon since the war started. Targeting civilian areas of Beirut, Israel killed over 100 Lebanese and caused a shocking amount of destruction. When asked about the Israeli attacks on Lebanon, Trump said that Lebanon was not included in the ceasefire, directly contradicting what Pakistan's Sharif posted on X. This also contradicts Iran's understanding of the ceasefire terms. In all likelihood, Netanyahu attacked Lebanon so brutally in order to provoke an Iranian response and scuttle the ceasefire.

From the moment that it was clear that the initial U.S. and Israeli attacks were not going to topple the Iranian regime, it was obvious that the U.S. would lose this war. The only questions are how badly we lose it and how long it takes. Trump appears willing to suffer his losses now and, perhaps, gain some toll revenue in exchange. Others, particularly Netanyahu and the Gulf Arab states, want to see the Iranian regime toppled in the same manner that Saddam was toppled in Iraq. The problem, however, is that the vast majority of Americans do not want an Iraq-style war. Nor is it clear that the U.S. even has the capacity for such a war in Iran. In lieu of that, those who want the war to continue seem willing to accept continued bombing, though it is not clear what that will achieve. It is very hard to internalize that despite the U.S.'s overwhelming military advantages, it cannot win the war. Many simply refuse to come to terms with that fact and are willing to continue the killing rather than acknowledge it.

In summary, Trump has reached a very undesirable agreement with Iran. One that is so bad from the viewpoint of the U.S. and its allies that the ceasefire will probably not last and the hoped-for peace agreement will not be reached. Nevertheless, the deal on the table probably represents the best agreement that the U.S. can hope to achieve. As hard as it would be to swallow, it is almost certainly better than what might be possible in the future.