Latest news with #diplomacy
CNN
19 minutes ago
- Politics
- CNN
Analysis: Why Trump's two-week pause on Iran makes sense — and why it may not work
It would be easy to mock Donald Trump for blinking. Again. After all, the president just decided not to decide whether to join Israel's assault on Iran for up to two weeks. But it's not necessarily a sign of weakness when a commander in chief decides to take his time over matters of life and death. 'We'd all like a diplomatic resolution here. And diplomacy with a firm deadline can be very effective,' Brett McGurk, a former senior White House and State Department official, told CNN's Anderson Cooper. 'If this is a firm deadline, and by the end of the two weeks we either need a diplomatic resolution … or the president is prepared to use force … that can be a very effective combination.' But Trump's record of unpredictability casts doubt on whether he will make use of the maneuvering room he's created. In both his presidencies, Trump has often imposed two-week action deadlines on himself on thorny issues — including infrastructure, trade deals and Russia sanctions — and then done nothing. This is consistent with his trademark life strategy to perpetually delay reckonings — whether over personal financial crises, legal threats or the impossible decisions that land on the Oval Office desk. Until Thursday, all the signs coming out of the White House were that Trump was moving close to ordering US bombing raids on Iran's subterranean nuclear plant at Fordow — despite the risk this could drag the United States into another Middle East war. But after reviewing strike options, he's pulled back for now. It didn't take long for Trump critics to fill social media with new sightings of TACO ('Trump always chickens out') syndrome. But Trump, for once, is operating in the real world and not the online one. No one knows what would happen if the US bombed Iran. The lives of US service personnel would be on the line. And geopolitical shockwaves could cause a regional war, an Iranian civil war, or a wave of reprisals from Tehran. Trump isn't the only president to equivocate over launching new military action in the Middle East as the dark shadow of the Iraq war still haunts US politics. Comparisons will be made to ex-President Barack Obama's decision to pass on bombing Syria to enforce a 'red line' over chemical weapons use in 2013, which many analysts now view as a mistake. Obama demurred because he couldn't be sure about what would happen the day after the US resorted to military force. Sometimes, a decision by a president not to wage war— when multiple stakeholders are clamoring for action — can be as courageous as one to order strikes. Trump is wrestling with the gravest national security dilemma of either of his presidencies. He has promised that Iran, which has threatened to wipe Israel off the map and regards the US as a Great Satan, will never be allowed to have a nuclear bomb. So, two-week pause or not, he may end up with no option but to use military force. This is like no other decision Trump has faced as president. It's one thing to set off a trade war on a Tuesday and defuse it on a Wednesday. But if Trump sends US B-2 bombers with their bunker-busting bombs on a mission to destroy Fordow, there's no going back. His delay gives him time. The question is whether he will use it. To begin with, the president has restored his own ability to take control of the timeline for US action. It often looked this week like he was being pushed into joining the conflict by the pace of Israel's assault on Iran. The strategic reality here is that Israel started a conflict — after an evaluation of its own critical interests — that it could not fully end on its own. Only the United States has the capacity to send bombs deep into the mountain protecting the Fordow enrichment plant. The president justified his pause by the need to give diplomacy one last try. 'Based on the fact that there's a substantial chance of negotiations that may or may not take place with Iran in the near future, I will make my decision whether or not to go within the next two weeks,' he said in a statement read out to reporters by White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt. Trump's statesmanship on failed Iran nuclear talks has not been adept, so breakthroughs seem unlikely. But possible new talks between his envoy Steve Witkoff and Iranian officials could test whether six days of relentless Israeli bombardments have shifted calculations among Iran's leaders. Would the leadership, for example, now consider a previously unpalatable decision to verifiably cede their nuclear program and right to enrich uranium in exchange for a chance at survival for the revolutionary regime? Trump probably needs to change his uncompromising approach to talks. He might follow the example of an illustrious predecessor. In a speech at American University only five months before his assassination, President John F. Kennedy reflected on the lessons he drew from the Cuban Missile crisis in 1962. 'Above all, while defending our own vital interests, nuclear powers must avert those confrontations which bring an adversary to a choice of either a humiliating retreat or a nuclear war,' Kennedy said. Trump's situation with Iran is not completely analogous, because Tehran is not believed to yet possess a nuclear weapon. But the principle is the same: For diplomacy to work, Trump will need to offer Iran a face-saving way out of the confrontation that could preserve a nominal sense of honor. So far, he's done the opposite, demanding 'UNCONDITIONAL SURRENDER' on social media. For a regime founded on opposing what it sees as decades of US imperialism and domination, this is an impossible condition. Karim Sadjadpour, a senior fellow at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, argued that conditions that historically precipitated Iranian concessions could be slotting into place. He identified three such factors — Iran perceives it faces existential economic pressure; a credible military threat; and diplomatic isolation. But Sadjadpour said a fourth trigger for progress was needed — 'a face-saving diplomatic exit.' 'The offer that was given to them was 'unconditional surrender.' That's what President Trump demanded of them. And most dictators are not prepared to take the offer of unconditional surrender,' Sadjadpour said. He added, 'I think we need to think seriously about packaging this a little bit differently so there's a ladder for them to climb down from.' Iran's next moves could also be influenced by its perceptions of Trump's true intent. The president's frequent and multiple climb-downs — for instance on his trade war and over his reluctance to impose any pressure on Russia over Ukraine — raise doubts about his credibility. Trump's malleability might have been one factor that prompted Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to use what Israel believes is a strategic window to take on Iran, even though he knew he could be dragging the US into a new war. If Iran's leaders conclude that Trump is a paper tiger, they may be tempted to call his bluff. They might make a dangerous mistake. But US history is also littered with disastrous examples of presidents pushed into using military force to protect their personal credibility. Trump's pause left Israel with its own questions. The Netanyahu government, with the help of former senior Israeli officials appearing on US TV networks, has left little doubt that it wants the United States to enter the fight. One possible scenario is that Netanyahu uses the next two weeks to examine options that Israel may have to disable Fordow and other facilities on its own. One of the few possibilities is a daring commando raid. This would be a huge risk with an uncertain chance of success. And it is unclear whether Israel on its own has the lift and the search-and-rescue capability that might allow it to carry off such an operation. 'The challenge for the Israelis is, if the United States gives negotiations a chance, will the Israelis wait?' Seth Jones, a former adviser to the commanding general of US special forces in Afghanistan, told CNN's Erin Burnett on Thursday. 'It is not out of the question … that they decide they have to conduct that operation in Fordow and not wait.' This may hint at another reason for Trump's pause. Maybe he's hoping that events over the next two weeks spare him the need to take a fateful decision. A two-week pause may also give the president time for two other priorities — to sell what may be an unpopular choice to stage military action at home — and to fully position US troops for an attack and any Iranian reprisals. The prospect of US strikes set off uproar inside the president's political base since his promise to steer clear of any more Middle East wars has always been central to his appeal. One of the most vocal opponents of new, extended US engagements is Steve Bannon, Trump's former political guru, who now has a popular YouTube show. Bannon had lunch with the president at the White House on Thursday. Another pro-Trump conservative, Tucker Carlson, has attacked right-wing media figures who are agitating for war in Iran. But the prospect of a MAGA revolt may be overstated. Bannon has indicated that if it came to it in the end, he'd get in line behind Trump. Trump also has a deep bond with his voters. He created his coalition; it did not create him, and he may have substantial leeway to lead his followers in a new direction. 'Trust in President Trump. President Trump has incredible instincts, and President Trump kept America and the world safe in his first term,' Leavitt said, in a direct message to the president's supporters on Thursday. This, however, won't move millions of Americans who oppose Trump. After five months in office that have ripped deep national divides — seemingly on purpose — he'll have a much harder job wining the support of the country as a whole.
CNN
32 minutes ago
- Politics
- CNN
Trump To Decide On Military Strikes In Iran Within 'Two Weeks' - Laura Coates Live - Podcast on CNN Audio
Trump To Decide On Military Strikes In Iran Within 'Two Weeks' Laura Coates Live 47 mins President Donald Trump said he will allow two weeks for diplomacy to proceed before deciding whether to launch a strike in Iran. A powerful Iran-backed militia in Iraq vowed to attack US military bases in the region if Trump decides to enter the conflict.
Khaleej Times
43 minutes ago
- Politics
- Khaleej Times
European, Iranian diplomats to meet as US mulls joining Israel campaign
[Editor's Note: Follow the KT live blog for live updates on the Israel-Iran conflict.] European foreign ministers will hold talks Friday with their Iranian counterpart, hoping to reach a diplomatic solution to the war with Israel as US President Donald Trump mulls the prospect of US involvement. Israel, claiming Iran was on the verge of developing a nuclear weapon, launched air strikes against its arch-enemy a week ago, triggering deadly exchanges. Sirens sounded in southern Israel on Friday morning after missiles were launched from Iran, the Israeli army said. It earlier warned people in Iran's northern industrial area of Sefidrood to evacuate ahead of Israeli strikes. European leaders urging de-escalation have scrambled to hold talks with Iran, as Trump said he would decide "within the next two weeks" whether to involve the United States in Israel's bombing campaign. Stay up to date with the latest news. Follow KT on WhatsApp Channels. Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi will meet with his French, German, British and EU counterparts in Geneva on Friday to discuss Iran's nuclear programme. Britain's Foreign Secretary David Lammy said "a window now exists within the next two weeks to achieve a diplomatic solution", after meeting senior US officials in Washington on Thursday. Lammy and US Secretary of State Marco Rubio "agreed Iran can never develop or acquire a nuclear weapon", according to the State Department. Netanyahu welcomed the prospect of US involvement in its campaign, while Russia, an Iranian ally, told the United States that joining the conflict would be an "extremely dangerous step". The UN Security Council is also due to convene on Friday for a second session on the conflict, which was requested by Iran with support from Russia, China and Pakistan, a diplomat told AFP on Wednesday. While Netanyahu has not publicly said that Israel is trying to topple Iran's supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, defence minister Israel Katz warned after the strike on Israel's Soroka hospital that Khamenei "can no longer be allowed to exist". A week of deadly exchanges between the two countries has plunged the Middle East into a new crisis, more than 20 months into the war between Israel and Palestinian militant group Hamas in the Gaza Strip. Panic Israel's Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has sworn Iran will "pay a heavy price" for a strike on an Israeli hospital on Thursday, an attack Tehran said was targeting a military and intelligence base. Soroka hospital's director Shlomi Codish said 40 people were wounded in the strike that destroyed several wards. World Health Organization director-general Tedros Adhanom hebreyesus called attacks on health facilities "appalling", while UN rights chief Volker Turk said civilians were being treated as "collateral damage". In Iran, people fleeing Israel's attacks described frightening scenes and difficult living conditions, including food shortages and limited internet access. "Those days and nights were very horrifying... hearing sirens, the wailing, the danger of being hit by missiles," University of Tehran student Mohammad Hassan told AFP, after returning to his native Pakistan. "People are really panicking," a 50-year-old Iranian pharmacist who did not want to be named told AFP at a crossing on the border with Turkey. Iran imposed a "nationwide internet shutdown" on Thursday -- the most extensive blackout since widespread anti-government protests in 2019 -- internet watchdog NetBlocks said. The shutdown "impacts the public's ability to stay connected at a time when communications are vital", NetBlocks wrote on X. Any US involvement in Israel's campaign against Iran would be expected to involve the bombing of a crucial underground nuclear facility in Fordo, using specially developed bunker-busting bombs. The Wall Street Journal reported that Trump told aides he had approved attack plans but was holding off to see if Iran would give up its nuclear programme. The US president had favoured a diplomatic route to stop Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons -- an ambition Tehran has consistently denied -- seeking a deal to replace the 2015 agreement he tore up in his first term. Dozens of US military aircraft were no longer visible at a US base in Qatar on Thursday, satellite images showed -- a possible move to shield them from potential Iranian strikes. Nuclear sites White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt claimed Iran was "a couple of weeks" away from producing an atomic bomb. Iran had been enriching uranium to 60 percent -- far above the 3.67-percent limit set by the 2015 deal, but still short of the 90 percent needed for a nuclear warhead. Israel has maintained ambiguity on its own arsenal, but the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute says it has 90 nuclear warheads. A key Iranian government body, the Guardian Council, threatened a "harsh response" if "the criminal American government and its stupid president... take action against Islamic Iran". On Thursday, Israel said it struck "dozens" of Iranian targets overnight, including the partially built Arak nuclear reactor and a uranium enrichment facility in Natanz. Iranian atomic energy agency chief Mohammad Eslami confirmed in a letter to the UN nuclear watchdog that the Arak reactor was hit, demanding action to stop Israel's "violation of international regulations". Iranian media reported blasts in Tehran late Thursday, while the Revolutionary Guards said more than 100 "combat and suicide" drones were launched at Israel. In the central Israeli city of Bat Yam, the body of a woman was found in a site hit on Sunday, taking the death toll in Israel from Iranian missiles since June 13 to 25 people, according to authorities. Iran said Sunday that Israeli strikes had killed at least 224 people, including military commanders, nuclear scientists and civilians.
CNN
an hour ago
- Politics
- CNN
Analysis: Why Trump's two-week pause on Iran makes sense — and why it may not work
It would be easy to mock Donald Trump for blinking. Again. After all, the president just decided not to decide whether to join Israel's assault on Iran for up to two weeks. But it's not necessarily a sign of weakness when a commander in chief decides to take his time over matters of life and death. 'We'd all like a diplomatic resolution here. And diplomacy with a firm deadline can be very effective,' Brett McGurk, a former senior White House and State Department official, told CNN's Anderson Cooper. 'If this is a firm deadline, and by the end of the two weeks we either need a diplomatic resolution … or the president is prepared to use force … that can be a very effective combination.' But Trump's record of unpredictability casts doubt on whether he will make use of the maneuvering room he's created. In both his presidencies, Trump has often imposed two-week action deadlines on himself on thorny issues — including infrastructure, trade deals and Russia sanctions — and then done nothing. This is consistent with his trademark life strategy to perpetually delay reckonings — whether over personal financial crises, legal threats or the impossible decisions that land on the Oval Office desk. Until Thursday, all the signs coming out of the White House were that Trump was moving close to ordering US bombing raids on Iran's subterranean nuclear plant at Fordow — despite the risk this could drag the United States into another Middle East war. But after reviewing strike options, he's pulled back for now. It didn't take long for Trump critics to fill social media with new sightings of TACO ('Trump always chickens out') syndrome. But Trump, for once, is operating in the real world and not the online one. No one knows what would happen if the US bombed Iran. The lives of US service personnel would be on the line. And geopolitical shockwaves could cause a regional war, an Iranian civil war, or a wave of reprisals from Tehran. Trump isn't the only president to equivocate over launching new military action in the Middle East as the dark shadow of the Iraq war still haunts US politics. Comparisons will be made to ex-President Barack Obama's decision to pass on bombing Syria to enforce a 'red line' over chemical weapons use in 2013, which many analysts now view as a mistake. Obama demurred because he couldn't be sure about what would happen the day after the US resorted to military force. Sometimes, a decision by a president not to wage war— when multiple stakeholders are clamoring for action — can be as courageous as one to order strikes. Trump is wrestling with the gravest national security dilemma of either of his presidencies. He has promised that Iran, which has threatened to wipe Israel off the map and regards the US as a Great Satan, will never be allowed to have a nuclear bomb. So, two-week pause or not, he may end up with no option but to use military force. This is like no other decision Trump has faced as president. It's one thing to set off a trade war on a Tuesday and defuse it on a Wednesday. But if Trump sends US B-2 bombers with their bunker-busting bombs on a mission to destroy Fordow, there's no going back. His delay gives him time. The question is whether he will use it. To begin with, the president has restored his own ability to take control of the timeline for US action. It often looked this week like he was being pushed into joining the conflict by the pace of Israel's assault on Iran. The strategic reality here is that Israel started a conflict — after an evaluation of its own critical interests — that it could not fully end on its own. Only the United States has the capacity to send bombs deep into the mountain protecting the Fordow enrichment plant. The president justified his pause by the need to give diplomacy one last try. 'Based on the fact that there's a substantial chance of negotiations that may or may not take place with Iran in the near future, I will make my decision whether or not to go within the next two weeks,' he said in a statement read out to reporters by White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt. Trump's statesmanship on failed Iran nuclear talks has not been adept, so breakthroughs seem unlikely. But possible new talks between his envoy Steve Witkoff and Iranian officials could test whether six days of relentless Israeli bombardments have shifted calculations among Iran's leaders. Would the leadership, for example, now consider a previously unpalatable decision to verifiably cede their nuclear program and right to enrich uranium in exchange for a chance at survival for the revolutionary regime? Trump probably needs to change his uncompromising approach to talks. He might follow the example of an illustrious predecessor. In a speech at American University only five months before his assassination, President John F. Kennedy reflected on the lessons he drew from the Cuban Missile crisis in 1962. 'Above all, while defending our own vital interests, nuclear powers must avert those confrontations which bring an adversary to a choice of either a humiliating retreat or a nuclear war,' Kennedy said. Trump's situation with Iran is not completely analogous, because Tehran is not believed to yet possess a nuclear weapon. But the principle is the same: For diplomacy to work, Trump will need to offer Iran a face-saving way out of the confrontation that could preserve a nominal sense of honor. So far, he's done the opposite, demanding 'UNCONDITIONAL SURRENDER' on social media. For a regime founded on opposing what it sees as decades of US imperialism and domination, this is an impossible condition. Karim Sadjadpour, a senior fellow at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, argued that conditions that historically precipitated Iranian concessions could be slotting into place. He identified three such factors — Iran perceives it faces existential economic pressure; a credible military threat; and diplomatic isolation. But Sadjadpour said a fourth trigger for progress was needed — 'a face-saving diplomatic exit.' 'The offer that was given to them was 'unconditional surrender.' That's what President Trump demanded of them. And most dictators are not prepared to take the offer of unconditional surrender,' Sadjadpour said. He added, 'I think we need to think seriously about packaging this a little bit differently so there's a ladder for them to climb down from.' Iran's next moves could also be influenced by its perceptions of Trump's true intent. The president's frequent and multiple climb-downs — for instance on his trade war and over his reluctance to impose any pressure on Russia over Ukraine — raise doubts about his credibility. Trump's malleability might have been one factor that prompted Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to use what Israel believes is a strategic window to take on Iran, even though he knew he could be dragging the US into a new war. If Iran's leaders conclude that Trump is a paper tiger, they may be tempted to call his bluff. They might make a dangerous mistake. But US history is also littered with disastrous examples of presidents pushed into using military force to protect their personal credibility. Trump's pause left Israel with its own questions. The Netanyahu government, with the help of former senior Israeli officials appearing on US TV networks, has left little doubt that it wants the United States to enter the fight. One possible scenario is that Netanyahu uses the next two weeks to examine options that Israel may have to disable Fordow and other facilities on its own. One of the few possibilities is a daring commando raid. This would be a huge risk with an uncertain chance of success. And it is unclear whether Israel on its own has the lift and the search-and-rescue capability that might allow it to carry off such an operation. 'The challenge for the Israelis is, if the United States gives negotiations a chance, will the Israelis wait?' Seth Jones, a former adviser to the commanding general of US special forces in Afghanistan, told CNN's Erin Burnett on Thursday. 'It is not out of the question … that they decide they have to conduct that operation in Fordow and not wait.' This may hint at another reason for Trump's pause. Maybe he's hoping that events over the next two weeks spare him the need to take a fateful decision. A two-week pause may also give the president time for two other priorities — to sell what may be an unpopular choice to stage military action at home — and to fully position US troops for an attack and any Iranian reprisals. The prospect of US strikes set off uproar inside the president's political base since his promise to steer clear of any more Middle East wars has always been central to his appeal. One of the most vocal opponents of new, extended US engagements is Steve Bannon, Trump's former political guru, who now has a popular YouTube show. Bannon had lunch with the president at the White House on Thursday. Another pro-Trump conservative, Tucker Carlson, has attacked right-wing media figures who are agitating for war in Iran. But the prospect of a MAGA revolt may be overstated. Bannon has indicated that if it came to it in the end, he'd get in line behind Trump. Trump also has a deep bond with his voters. He created his coalition; it did not create him, and he may have substantial leeway to lead his followers in a new direction. 'Trust in President Trump. President Trump has incredible instincts, and President Trump kept America and the world safe in his first term,' Leavitt said, in a direct message to the president's supporters on Thursday. This, however, won't move millions of Americans who oppose Trump. After five months in office that have ripped deep national divides — seemingly on purpose — he'll have a much harder job wining the support of the country as a whole.
RNZ News
an hour ago
- Politics
- RNZ News
Trump's new two-week negotiating window sets off scramble to restart stalled Iran talks
By Kevin Liptak, Kylie Atwood and Jennifer Hansler , CNN Photo: AFP / Brendan Smialowski US President Donald Trump's decision to open a two-week negotiating window before deciding on striking Iran has set off an urgent effort to restart talks that had been deadlocked, when Israel began its bombing campaign last week . The hope among Trump and his advisers is that Iran - under constant Israeli attack and suffering losses to its missile arsenal - will relent on its hardline position and agree to terms it had previously rejected, including abandoning its enrichment of uranium, according to US officials. The deferred decision, which came after days of increasingly martial messages from the president suggesting he was preparing to order a strike, also gives Trump more time to weigh the potential consequences - including the chance it could drag the United States into the type of foreign conflict he promised to avoid. Negotiating a diplomatic solution in Trump's condensed timeline appeared to face significant early hurdles. Earlier this week, discussions were underway inside the White House to dispatch Middle East envoy Steve Witkoff and Vice President JD Vance to the region for talks with Iran, but as Trump grew wary that diplomatic efforts might succeed, the idea never resulted in scheduled talks, and both Vance and Witkoff remained in Washington as of Thursday. Foreign ministers from Britain, Germany and France are travelling to Geneva on Friday to hold talks with Iranian representatives, and have been briefed on the details of the last deal Witkoff offered to Iran, which Tehran ultimately rejected, before the Israeli strikes began. US officials did not have high expectations of success for Friday's meeting in Geneva, but a White House official kept the door open to progress. "This is a meeting between European leaders and Iran," a White House official said. "The President supports diplomatic efforts from our allies that could bring Iran closer to taking his deal." Iran's consistent message to the US since Israel began its strikes has been it would not engage in further talks, until the ongoing Israeli operation ends, two sources familiar with the messages said. The US had so far not pressured Israel to halt its strikes, sources said, and Trump said this week that his message to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu had been to "keep going". So far, Iran has offered no indication it is willing to move off its positions on enrichment, which it views as a red line. As of Thursday, no official talks between the US and Iran were on the books, US officials said. In putting off a decision, Trump appears to be placing more stock in a diplomatic solution that only a day earlier he appeared to suggest was out of reach. "I think the president has made it clear he always wants to pursue diplomacy, but believe me, the president is unafraid to use strength if necessary," press secretary Karoline Leavitt said, after relaying Trump's new two-week timeline. "Iran and the entire world should know that the United States military is the strongest and most lethal fighting force in the world, and we have capabilities that no other country on this planet possesses." New vehicle tracks and dirt piles over underground centrifuge buildings at Natanz enrichment facility. Photo: AFP / Maxar Technologies In a string of situation room meetings over the course of this week, Trump has quizzed advisers about the likelihood US bunker-buster bombs could entirely eliminate Iran's underground nuclear facility at Fordow and how long such an operation might last, according to people familiar with the conversations. He has repeatedly insisted he wants to avoid taking action that could devolve into a multi-year conflict, something many of his own loyalists - including one-time top strategist Steve Bannon, with whom the president had lunch Thursday - argue would be unavoidable, should he make the decision to go ahead. While the president has seen the military options, he remains worried about a longer-term war. Any assessments on whether a strike would cause prolonged US engagement are predictive and, by their nature, not entirely satisfactory, one official said. The new, within-two-weeks time-frame for talks was not universally welcomed. An Israeli intelligence official expressed dismay that Trump would not make a decision - one way or the other. "This is not helping," the official said. Trump will continue to convene top-level intelligence briefings over the coming days, returning to Washington early from a weekend trip to his property in New Jersey to be updated at the White House. He has relied principally on CIA director John Ratcliffe and Joint Chiefs chairman Gen Dan Caine in meetings to discuss his options, according to people familiar with the matter. At the centre of the diplomatic efforts will be Witkoff, the president's friend and foreign envoy, who has led negotiations meant to curb Tehran's nuclear ambitions. Witkoff began direct-messaging with his Iranian counterpart, Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi, earlier this month and the administration has maintained some communications with Iranian officials over the past tense days, as Trump weighed a strike. The plan Witkoff last offered to Tehran would have required Iran to eventually end all uranium enrichment on its soil and, on Thursday, the White House said it still viewed a ban on Iranian uranium enrichment as necessary to a final deal. As the Europeans head into Friday's meeting, they will be "taking the temperature" on how receptive the Iranians are to finding a diplomatic solution, given their belief that strikes in both directions are not a solution, a European official said. European leaders believe the risks of Iran's nuclear programme persist even amid Israel's strikes, because Tehran maintains nuclear know-how and may still have clandestine nuclear-related efforts that won't get demolished by military strikes. Meanwhile, most US diplomats who are not in Trump's inner circle at the State Department have not been given specific guidance to offer US allies on the diplomatic efforts, a US official and a European diplomat said. That has led to many frustrating discussions with foreign interlocutors as US diplomats have very few answers to give the allies as they try to determine their diplomatic and military posture in the region, pointing only to Trump's own words. Marco Rubio. Photo: Pool / AFP / Jacquelyn Martin As Trump has weighed his options, Secretary of State Marco Rubio has been close by, also departing early from the Group of 7 summit in Canada along with the commander in chief earlier this week. On Monday, the top US diplomat spoke with his French, British and European Union counterparts about efforts to "encourage a diplomatic path that ensures Iran never develops a nuclear weapon", according to State Department readouts of the calls. On Wednesday, Rubio "compared notes" on the matter with the Norwegian foreign minister. Rubio met with British Foreign Secretary David Lammy on Thursday, before Lammy departed for the Geneva talks, and the two "agreed Iran can never develop or acquire a nuclear weapon", according to the State Department. "Meeting with Secretary of State Rubio and Special Envoy to the Middle East Witkoff in the White House today, we discussed how Iran must make a deal to avoid a deepening conflict," Lammy said in a statement Thursday. "A window now exists within the next two weeks to achieve a diplomatic solution." US officials, including Witkoff, have also been actively engaged with officials in the region, many of whom have offered their help in mediating a diplomatic path forward. Sources said Iran had responded to messages from third parties, but their responses had not changed. - CNN
