Latest news with #JCPOA
Yahoo
3 hours ago
- Politics
- Yahoo
Can divided European powers help end Israel's war on Iran?
The three largest European nations by population, Germany, France and the UK, held talks with Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi in Geneva, Switzerland, on Friday, in an effort to avert a protracted war in the Middle East. US President Donald Trump, who has said he will decide within two weeks whether to join the assault on Tehran, denounced the talks with European leaders as a failure. 'Iran doesn't want to speak to Europe. They want to speak to us. Europe is not going to be able to help in this one,' he told reporters. Araghchi had said Iran was not attending the talks in Geneva to negotiate anyway, only to listen. However, he added, 'There is no room for negotiations with the US [either] until the Israeli aggression stops,' as Iran and Israel traded salvoes of missiles and drones. The US has been Israel's chief ally and supporter in all its wars, and is the only country with major military assets deployed in the region, which might be able to alter the course of the war. Germany, France and the UK – referred to as the E3 in the context of Iran talks – helped negotiate a 2015 treaty with Iran. The 2015 treaty, the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), saw Iran agree to develop only peaceful nuclear programmes and to submit to independent monitoring. Russia, China and the United States also helped negotiate it, as did the UN. But Trump withdrew the US from the JCPOA in May 2018, during his first term as president. The E3 tried to keep the treaty alive but failed. Iran abandoned it a year after the US did. On Saturday, the EU high commissioner for external action, Kaja Kallas, who also attended the talks on Friday, issued a statement reaffirming 'commitment to Israel's security' and 'longstanding concerns about Iran's expansion of its nuclear programme, which has no credible civilian purpose, in violation of almost all the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) provisions'. But Israel's war in Gaza has divided the E3 over their approach to Israel, weakening European foreign policy unity further, although all want to avoid another war on Europe's E3 positions on Israel have diverged since Israel's war in Gaza began in October 2023. Germany has remained the most ardently pro-Israel, refusing to criticise Israel for indiscriminate bombing of civilians in Gaza and halting its funding to UNWRA, the UN agency assisting Palestinian refugees, which Israel accuses of aiding Hamas. Originally pro-Israel, the UK somewhat changed its stance after Labour's election victory last year. Earlier this month, the UK joined four other countries in formally sanctioning Israel's far-right national security minister, Itamar Ben-Gvir, and Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich, for 'incitement of violence' against Palestinians in the occupied West Bank and Gaza. Israel called the decision 'outrageous' and 'unacceptable'. France is even more sceptical towards Israel. It was one of four EU members that started calling for a Gaza ceasefire in April last year. A year later, on April 9, French President Emmanuel Macron said he would formally recognise the state of Palestine within months, partly because 'at some point, it will be right', and partly to encourage Arab states to recognise Israel. France was reported to be lobbying other European nations to follow suit. Spain, Norway and Ireland all formally recognised Palestine the following month. They are the three biggest economies in Europe, with a collective gross domestic product (GDP) of about $11 trillion. Two of them, France and the UK, possess aircraft carriers and expeditionary forces that have deployed to the Middle East and North Africa regions. They are also nuclear powers. Ultimately, though, none of these things is enough to sway either Iran or Israel on matters of national security. The true value of the E3 lies in their 'acceptability' to both Iran and Israel as good-faith mediators and their ability to work towards common goals with the US. 'Germany, France and the UK have attempted to mediate for more than 20 years, and their approach has been milder than that of the US,' George Tzogopoulos, a lecturer in international relations at the European Institute in Nice, told Al Jazeera. 'The same is happening now. We have a war crisis, and these three prioritise diplomacy for the conflict to stop if possible and for negotiations to restart.' It would be difficult, given their failure to resuscitate the JCPOA without the US. 'The main reason [the E3 failed with the JCPOA] is the conclusion, made by both the Trump administration, President Trump himself, and the Israeli government that diplomacy cannot work in the case of Iran and, therefore, the role of the three was sidelined,' said Tzogopoulos. But it is also difficult for them to coordinate with the US. Trump has now sidelined his own intelligence community to adopt the Israeli view that Iran is developing a bomb. On Friday, Trump told reporters that his director of national intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard, was 'wrong' when she testified that Iran was not building a nuclear weapon and that Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei had not re-authorised the country's suspended nuclear weapons programme. 'If Israel has evidence that Iran was dashing for a bomb, I think it needs to come out more publicly and share that, because nobody else is confirming that assessment,' said Kelsey Davenport, director for nonproliferation policy at the Arms Control Association, a nongovernmental organisation based in the US. 'If there is some coordination between the US and the E3, we might be more optimistic, but for Europe, for the E3 to act autonomously, I wouldn't bet my money on their potential success,' he said. 'The Europeans have very low chances,' agreed Angelos Syrigos, a professor of international law at Panteion University in Athens. 'The only people who can intervene seriously are the Americans. But I don't know if the Iranians are open to that. To have final peace, you usually need a decisive defeat,' he said, referring to the Yom Kippur War between Israel and Egypt of 1973, which led to the Camp David agreement six years later, and US intervention in the Yugoslav War, which led to the Dayton Accord in 1995. 'One party has to understand there is no military solution.'No, say experts, because China, Russia and the US disagree on Israel and Iran. 'The Security Council won't find a solution to this,' said Syrigos. 'Either the US or Russia or China will veto it. The difference is mainly between the US and China. The Chinese have invested a lot in Iran in recent years. That's where they buy most of their oil; they send [Iran] materials for nuclear weapons. It's China that is mostly connected to Iran.' Russia has called on the US not to attack Iran, because of the risk of destabilising the region. But Russia also does not have the power to come to Iran's aid, said Syrigos. 'Right now, Russia is going along with the US. It doesn't want to get involved. It hasn't the power. So, it's turning a necessity into a voluntary act,' he said. 'The logic of war will guide diplomatic efforts at this point, and we cannot know how the war will go, or the extent of the damage to Iran's nuclear programme,' said Tzogopoulos.
Newsweek
4 hours ago
- Politics
- Newsweek
Satellite Images Show Israeli Strike Damage to Iranian Nuclear Site
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. The Israeli military has released satellite images showing the destruction from its Friday night strikes on an Iranian nuclear facility in Isfahan. The strikes come as the conflict enters its ninth day. Newsweek has reached out to Iran's Foreign Ministry for comment via email on Saturday. Why It Matters This month, the conflict between Israel and Iran has escalated dramatically, with President Donald Trump calling for the evacuation of Tehran, Iran's capital city home to over 9.5 million people. Israel initially struck Tehran and several other cities in "Operation Rising Lion," a campaign it said was meant to preempt a planned Iranian attack and disrupt Iran's nuclear capabilities. Iran, which has said its nuclear program is for peaceful purposes, has since retaliated, though Israeli defense systems—bolstered by U.S. military technology—have intercepted about 99 percent of incoming missile fire, according to Israeli officials on Saturday morning in an X, formerly Twitter, post. Iran hit a hospital in southern Israel on Thursday, and local reports noted that buildings in Tel Aviv were on fire from Iranian missiles on Friday. The U.S. is Israel's closest ally, providing billions of dollars in military aid annually. Following the 1979 Iranian Revolution, diplomatic relations between the U.S. and Iran disintegrated, and the two countries have held strained, distrusting relations over the past four-decades. Iran's nuclear program has long been a focal point of U.S. and Israeli concern, with Iran insisting its efforts are solely for energy purposes. The second Trump administration had been involved in talks with Iran ahead of the conflict, although no formal diplomacy has come out of it. During his first presidency, Trump withdrew from the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), known as the Iran Nuclear Deal. What To Know The Israel Defense Forces (IDF) shared a video compilation on X on Saturday showing satellite imagery and footage of Isfahan Nuclear Technology Center, which it struck on Friday night. The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) said in statement on Saturday that the center was "was previously under IAEA monitoring and verification as part of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), including with installed Agency cameras." IAEA Director General Rafael Grossi said: "We know this facility well. There was no nuclear material at this site and therefore the attack on it will have no radiological consequences." "Overnight, we deepened the strike on the nuclear site in Isfahan and in western Iran. On the screen, you can see the site where reconversion of enriched uranium takes place. This is the stage following enrichment in the process of developing a nuclear weapon," IDF spokesperson Effie Defrin wrote on X. Israel had previously struck the center in the opening days of its attacks this month. Building upon the last strike, "last night, we struck it again in a wide-scale strike to reinforce our achievements," Defrin wrote in the post. Grossi, previously confirmed in a Friday statement, that four buildings were damaged in Israel's prior attack on the compound, "the central chemical laboratory, a uranium conversion plant, the Tehran reactor-fuel manufacturing plant, and the enriched uranium metal processing facility, which was under construction." "Overnight, we deepened the strike on the nuclear site in Isfahan and in western Iran. On the screen, you can see the site where reconversion of enriched uranium takes place. This is the stage following enrichment in the process of developing a nuclear weapon. We had already... — Israel Defense Forces (@IDF) June 21, 2025 The IDF's Saturday morning video shows several buildings in a compound scorched, smoking and strewn with significant, structural debris. Iranian state media reported that the attack damaged the site but did not lead to any contamination. Israel also struck sites in southwestern Iran on Friday night. Over the past nine days, Israel has struck numerous Iranian sites, both nuclear facilities, including Natanz, as well as residential areas, with at least 630 people have been killed in Iran, with more than 1,300 wounded according to the Associated Press. Meanwhile, Israel states that 24 people have been killed from Iranian strikes. Several diplomats met for talks in Geneva on Friday, but the efforts failed to produce a breakthrough. Some embassies in Iran, including Germany's, have begun closing amid the ongoing conflict. Black smoke billows from the headquarters of Iranian state television in Tehran following an Israeli attack on June 16. Black smoke billows from the headquarters of Iranian state television in Tehran following an Israeli attack on June 16. 2025 Kyodo News/Ap Images What People Are Saying Rafael Grossi, head of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), said in June 20 statement: "Attacks on nuclear sites in the Islamic Republic of Iran have caused a sharp degradation in nuclear safety and security in Iran. Though they have not so far led to a radiological release affecting the public, there is a danger this could occur." Mike Huckabee, U.S. ambassador to Israel, said in a June 21 post on X: "The Department of State has begun assisted departure flights from Israel." Iranian Foreign Minister Seyed Abbas Araghchi, said in a June 18 X post: "Iran solely acts in self-defense. Even in the face of the most outrageous aggression against our people, Iran has so far only retaliated against the Israeli regime and not those who are aiding and abetting it. Just like Netanyahu manufactured this war to destroy diplomacy, the world should be highly alarmed about increasing attempts by the failing Israeli regime to get others to bail it out and to expand the flames to the region and beyond." The post continued: "Iran has proven in action what it has always publicly committed itself to: we have never sought and will never seek nuclear weapons. If otherwise, what better pretext could we possibly need for developing those inhuman weapons than the current aggression by the region's only nuclear-armed regime?" What Happens Next? The conflict remains volatile, with Israel continuing its military campaign and Iran vowing not to back down. Trump has said he will wait up to two weeks before deciding whether to support U.S. involvement in the attacks. Meanwhile, reports indicate American bombers and naval fleets are mobilizing in preparation. In a Saturday notice, the State Department said, "U.S. citizens seeking to depart Israel or the West Bank should take the first available option, even if it is not your first choice of destination." The department has "begun assisted departure flights from Israel," it said, noting that U.S. citizens awaiting to government assistance to leaving Israel should complete a crisis intake form. Due to the closure of the Iranian airspace, U.S. citizens seeking to leave the country should "depart by land to Azerbaijan, Armenia, or Türkiye if they deem conditions are safe/if they can do so safely." "Because of the limitations on consular support in Iran, we do not anticipate offering direct U.S. government assisted departure from Iran. U.S. citizens seeking departure should take advantage of existing means to leave Iran," the notice said.
CNN
7 hours ago
- Business
- CNN
Week Two of the Iran Crisis: Diplomatic offramp is narrowing but not closed (yet)
As we approach Day 10 of the Israel-Iran crisis, the focus is on whether diplomacy can succeed and, if not, whether President Donald Trump will make the decision to use US military force to destroy what's left of Iran's nuclear infrastructure — particularly the deeply buried enrichment facility known as Fordow. The situation as of Saturday, two days after President Trump gave two weeks to test diplomacy, appeared to have reached a steady state. This includes Israel's control of Iranian skies and striking targets at will, as well as Iran still being able to launch missile barrages albeit in smaller numbers at Israel. Militarily, this equation ultimately favors Israel, whose position is likely strengthening further this week. But that is a tactical equation and does not lead to a clear strategic endgame, particularly with respect to Iran's nuclear program. So where is this crisis headed? I see four possible scenarios: This remains the preferred outcome. But after this week's talks in Geneva between Iran and European allies, it's not trending well. Those talks went nowhere. Iran held to its positions from before the crisis. The US was not present. And the entire backdrop — the Intercontinental Hotel in Geneva, where the JCPOA was negotiated ten years ago — was reminiscent of another era. There may be more direct engagements ongoing with United States and Iran (likely through Qataris and Omanis) but short of that, the diplomatic track has no real traction. This is unfortunate, as it's the best way to end the crisis — and all Iran needs to do is signal to Trump's envoy, Steve Witkoff, that it is prepared to agree to the proposal he presented to Iran about six weeks ago. That proposal is reportedly a balanced one, resulting in Iran giving up its enrichment program but over time and as part of an international consortium to supply nuclear fuel for a peaceful and monitored civilian-nuclear program. Iran's refusal to engage directly on this proposal both before the crisis and especially now may be a fatal and fateful mistake. If there is one off-ramp available, it's this one. The US is continuing to position military assets in the Middle East and will soon have three Carrier Strike Groups in the theater. This is a massive show of force, and has not been seen since 2012, notably at another point of stalled diplomacy with Iran on its nuclear program and with Iran threatening to close the Strait of Hormuz in response to American sanctions. Trump has clearly given the order to position and prepare for a strike. That can help reinforce the diplomacy as Iran must know at the end of the two-week deadline, the United States is prepared to use force to render Fordow inoperable, and Iran has no chance of defending against such an operation. The more the United States appears to be gearing up for such an operation, the more likely Iran might be ready in the end to make a deal the US can accept. As Anderson Cooper and I discussed shortly after Trump declared a two-week timeframe, 'diplomacy with a deadline' can be effective and the buildup of military forces serves the dual purpose of reinforcing the diplomatic track while also preparing for a strike should diplomacy fail. At the end of this period, Iran must understand that it will not have enrichment facilities – currently, ten cascades of highly advanced centrifuges – at Fordow. That can be archived diplomatically (preferred) or militarily. While Trump has ordered the positioning for a strike, it's unclear whether he might in the end order one. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said on Friday that Israel may have ways to take out Fordow without the United States. That might look like 'Operation Many Ways,' which I've discussed this past week on AC360. Operation Many Ways was an Israeli commando raid last September against a deeply buried Iranian missile facility in Syria. The facility was nearly the same depth as Fordow and naming the operation 'Many Ways' was a signal to Iran that Israel has just that when it comes to destroying deeply buried facilities. Related video Watch: CNN investigates Israel's strikes on key Iranian officials — and their civilian toll I'm doubtful as to the feasibility of such an operation in Iran, however. It's high risk and a vast distance. A nuclear enrichment site is also far different from a missile facility. But no doubt the Israelis are looking at all options here and they don't want to complete the military campaign with the Fordow facility intact. So if the Americans stay on the sidelines, expect the Israelis to try something on their own on Fordow. In the wake of either of 2 or 3 above, I believe Israel could declare the end of major operations. Iran would respond, but from an Israeli and US perspective there would be an endpoint once Fordow is dismantled together with the other main nuclear facilities at Natanz and Isfahan, which are already damaged. Short of the three options laid out above, the most likely course is the crisis simply goes on. That would mean Israel continues to control Iran's airspace. It continues to strike targets. Iran continues to muster barrages at times, but its missile stockpile (and launchers will deplete). This scenario is an inconclusive end with Iran still having massive enrichment capabilities but Israel hovering over Iran to ensure they're never used, as fledgling diplomacy continues in the background. My Assessment: I think at this stage we're most likely to see either option 2 or option 4 even while continuing to do all we can to push for option 1 — the diplomatic resolution. So, given that the preferred endgame is diplomacy, yet with talks going nowhere, how might diplomacy be invigorated over the coming week? First, the United States should make clear the two-week deadline is real and that if Iran refuses to engage constructively, then a strike will be the inevitable result of Iran's own poor choices. That deadline together with a credible offer to Iran — which has been on the table since before the crisis — remains the best possible chance for a diplomatic offramp. Second, is a more creative possibility. Sometimes in a crisis, you want to enlarge the problem set, and here – that means Gaza. The Gaza conflict is ongoing in the background of the Iran crisis. There is now a deal on the table backed by Israel for a 60-day ceasefire in Gaza in exchange for Hamas releasing half the living hostages (10 of 20). Hamas has rejected that deal, but it did so before Israel's attack into Iran and the removal of many of its Iranian backers, such as the leaders of the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps. In my experience with Hamas, it can be far more flexible when its allies have suffered defeats, as happened with the Gaza ceasefire deal earlier this year following Israel's defeat of Hezbollah in Lebanon and a subsequent ceasefire deal in Lebanon. Thus, one idea might be the 60-day ceasefire in Gaza together with a 60-day freeze on enrichment in Iran with an aim to find more permanent solutions at the end of this two-month period. Israel is in such a position of strength it might be amenable to this and the U.S. could help broker it as a means for defusing the broader Middle East crises and in a manner that does not allow Iran or Hamas to regroup. After all, the fastest way to end the horror in Gaza is for Hamas to release just ten hostages, and the fastest way to end the crisis with Iran is for Iran to accept the deal that Witkoff proposed earlier this year. There may be merit in trying these together, particularly as both Iran and Hamas are in their weakest state in years. At bottom, President Trump has bought some time and space with his 'two-week' deadline, together with a preference for a diplomatic resolution. But now three days into that two-week period, there appears to be little momentum on the diplomatic track even as U.S. forces continue their massive buildup in the region.
CNN
7 hours ago
- Business
- CNN
Week Two of the Iran Crisis: Diplomatic offramp is narrowing but not closed (yet)
As we approach Day 10 of the Israel-Iran crisis, the focus is on whether diplomacy can succeed and, if not, whether President Donald Trump will make the decision to use US military force to destroy what's left of Iran's nuclear infrastructure — particularly the deeply buried enrichment facility known as Fordow. The situation as of Saturday, two days after President Trump gave two weeks to test diplomacy, appeared to have reached a steady state. This includes Israel's control of Iranian skies and striking targets at will, as well as Iran still being able to launch missile barrages albeit in smaller numbers at Israel. Militarily, this equation ultimately favors Israel, whose position is likely strengthening further this week. But that is a tactical equation and does not lead to a clear strategic endgame, particularly with respect to Iran's nuclear program. So where is this crisis headed? I see four possible scenarios: This remains the preferred outcome. But after this week's talks in Geneva between Iran and European allies, it's not trending well. Those talks went nowhere. Iran held to its positions from before the crisis. The US was not present. And the entire backdrop — the Intercontinental Hotel in Geneva, where the JCPOA was negotiated ten years ago — was reminiscent of another era. There may be more direct engagements ongoing with United States and Iran (likely through Qataris and Omanis) but short of that, the diplomatic track has no real traction. This is unfortunate, as it's the best way to end the crisis — and all Iran needs to do is signal to Trump's envoy, Steve Witkoff, that it is prepared to agree to the proposal he presented to Iran about six weeks ago. That proposal is reportedly a balanced one, resulting in Iran giving up its enrichment program but over time and as part of an international consortium to supply nuclear fuel for a peaceful and monitored civilian-nuclear program. Iran's refusal to engage directly on this proposal both before the crisis and especially now may be a fatal and fateful mistake. If there is one off-ramp available, it's this one. The US is continuing to position military assets in the Middle East and will soon have three Carrier Strike Groups in the theater. This is a massive show of force, and has not been seen since 2012, notably at another point of stalled diplomacy with Iran on its nuclear program and with Iran threatening to close the Strait of Hormuz in response to American sanctions. Trump has clearly given the order to position and prepare for a strike. That can help reinforce the diplomacy as Iran must know at the end of the two-week deadline, the United States is prepared to use force to render Fordow inoperable, and Iran has no chance of defending against such an operation. The more the United States appears to be gearing up for such an operation, the more likely Iran might be ready in the end to make a deal the US can accept. As Anderson Cooper and I discussed shortly after Trump declared a two-week timeframe, 'diplomacy with a deadline' can be effective and the buildup of military forces serves the dual purpose of reinforcing the diplomatic track while also preparing for a strike should diplomacy fail. At the end of this period, Iran must understand that it will not have enrichment facilities – currently, ten cascades of highly advanced centrifuges – at Fordow. That can be archived diplomatically (preferred) or militarily. While Trump has ordered the positioning for a strike, it's unclear whether he might in the end order one. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said on Friday that Israel may have ways to take out Fordow without the United States. That might look like 'Operation Many Ways,' which I've discussed this past week on AC360. Operation Many Ways was an Israeli commando raid last September against a deeply buried Iranian missile facility in Syria. The facility was nearly the same depth as Fordow and naming the operation 'Many Ways' was a signal to Iran that Israel has just that when it comes to destroying deeply buried facilities. Related video Watch: CNN investigates Israel's strikes on key Iranian officials — and their civilian toll I'm doubtful as to the feasibility of such an operation in Iran, however. It's high risk and a vast distance. A nuclear enrichment site is also far different from a missile facility. But no doubt the Israelis are looking at all options here and they don't want to complete the military campaign with the Fordow facility intact. So if the Americans stay on the sidelines, expect the Israelis to try something on their own on Fordow. In the wake of either of 2 or 3 above, I believe Israel could declare the end of major operations. Iran would respond, but from an Israeli and US perspective there would be an endpoint once Fordow is dismantled together with the other main nuclear facilities at Natanz and Isfahan, which are already damaged. Short of the three options laid out above, the most likely course is the crisis simply goes on. That would mean Israel continues to control Iran's airspace. It continues to strike targets. Iran continues to muster barrages at times, but its missile stockpile (and launchers will deplete). This scenario is an inconclusive end with Iran still having massive enrichment capabilities but Israel hovering over Iran to ensure they're never used, as fledgling diplomacy continues in the background. My Assessment: I think at this stage we're most likely to see either option 2 or option 4 even while continuing to do all we can to push for option 1 — the diplomatic resolution. So, given that the preferred endgame is diplomacy, yet with talks going nowhere, how might diplomacy be invigorated over the coming week? First, the United States should make clear the two-week deadline is real and that if Iran refuses to engage constructively, then a strike will be the inevitable result of Iran's own poor choices. That deadline together with a credible offer to Iran — which has been on the table since before the crisis — remains the best possible chance for a diplomatic offramp. Second, is a more creative possibility. Sometimes in a crisis, you want to enlarge the problem set, and here – that means Gaza. The Gaza conflict is ongoing in the background of the Iran crisis. There is now a deal on the table backed by Israel for a 60-day ceasefire in Gaza in exchange for Hamas releasing half the living hostages (10 of 20). Hamas has rejected that deal, but it did so before Israel's attack into Iran and the removal of many of its Iranian backers, such as the leaders of the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps. In my experience with Hamas, it can be far more flexible when its allies have suffered defeats, as happened with the Gaza ceasefire deal earlier this year following Israel's defeat of Hezbollah in Lebanon and a subsequent ceasefire deal in Lebanon. Thus, one idea might be the 60-day ceasefire in Gaza together with a 60-day freeze on enrichment in Iran with an aim to find more permanent solutions at the end of this two-month period. Israel is in such a position of strength it might be amenable to this and the U.S. could help broker it as a means for defusing the broader Middle East crises and in a manner that does not allow Iran or Hamas to regroup. After all, the fastest way to end the horror in Gaza is for Hamas to release just ten hostages, and the fastest way to end the crisis with Iran is for Iran to accept the deal that Witkoff proposed earlier this year. There may be merit in trying these together, particularly as both Iran and Hamas are in their weakest state in years. At bottom, President Trump has bought some time and space with his 'two-week' deadline, together with a preference for a diplomatic resolution. But now three days into that two-week period, there appears to be little momentum on the diplomatic track even as U.S. forces continue their massive buildup in the region.
CNN
7 hours ago
- Business
- CNN
Week Two of the Iran Crisis: Diplomatic offramp is narrowing but not closed (yet)
As we approach Day 10 of the Israel-Iran crisis, the focus is on whether diplomacy can succeed and, if not, whether President Donald Trump will make the decision to use US military force to destroy what's left of Iran's nuclear infrastructure — particularly the deeply buried enrichment facility known as Fordow. The situation as of Saturday, two days after President Trump gave two weeks to test diplomacy, appeared to have reached a steady state. This includes Israel's control of Iranian skies and striking targets at will, as well as Iran still being able to launch missile barrages albeit in smaller numbers at Israel. Militarily, this equation ultimately favors Israel, whose position is likely strengthening further this week. But that is a tactical equation and does not lead to a clear strategic endgame, particularly with respect to Iran's nuclear program. So where is this crisis headed? I see four possible scenarios: This remains the preferred outcome. But after this week's talks in Geneva between Iran and European allies, it's not trending well. Those talks went nowhere. Iran held to its positions from before the crisis. The US was not present. And the entire backdrop — the Intercontinental Hotel in Geneva, where the JCPOA was negotiated ten years ago — was reminiscent of another era. There may be more direct engagements ongoing with United States and Iran (likely through Qataris and Omanis) but short of that, the diplomatic track has no real traction. This is unfortunate, as it's the best way to end the crisis — and all Iran needs to do is signal to Trump's envoy, Steve Witkoff, that it is prepared to agree to the proposal he presented to Iran about six weeks ago. That proposal is reportedly a balanced one, resulting in Iran giving up its enrichment program but over time and as part of an international consortium to supply nuclear fuel for a peaceful and monitored civilian-nuclear program. Iran's refusal to engage directly on this proposal both before the crisis and especially now may be a fatal and fateful mistake. If there is one off-ramp available, it's this one. The US is continuing to position military assets in the Middle East and will soon have three Carrier Strike Groups in the theater. This is a massive show of force, and has not been seen since 2012, notably at another point of stalled diplomacy with Iran on its nuclear program and with Iran threatening to close the Strait of Hormuz in response to American sanctions. Trump has clearly given the order to position and prepare for a strike. That can help reinforce the diplomacy as Iran must know at the end of the two-week deadline, the United States is prepared to use force to render Fordow inoperable, and Iran has no chance of defending against such an operation. The more the United States appears to be gearing up for such an operation, the more likely Iran might be ready in the end to make a deal the US can accept. As Anderson Cooper and I discussed shortly after Trump declared a two-week timeframe, 'diplomacy with a deadline' can be effective and the buildup of military forces serves the dual purpose of reinforcing the diplomatic track while also preparing for a strike should diplomacy fail. At the end of this period, Iran must understand that it will not have enrichment facilities – currently, ten cascades of highly advanced centrifuges – at Fordow. That can be archived diplomatically (preferred) or militarily. While Trump has ordered the positioning for a strike, it's unclear whether he might in the end order one. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said on Friday that Israel may have ways to take out Fordow without the United States. That might look like 'Operation Many Ways,' which I've discussed this past week on AC360. Operation Many Ways was an Israeli commando raid last September against a deeply buried Iranian missile facility in Syria. The facility was nearly the same depth as Fordow and naming the operation 'Many Ways' was a signal to Iran that Israel has just that when it comes to destroying deeply buried facilities. Related video Watch: CNN investigates Israel's strikes on key Iranian officials — and their civilian toll I'm doubtful as to the feasibility of such an operation in Iran, however. It's high risk and a vast distance. A nuclear enrichment site is also far different from a missile facility. But no doubt the Israelis are looking at all options here and they don't want to complete the military campaign with the Fordow facility intact. So if the Americans stay on the sidelines, expect the Israelis to try something on their own on Fordow. In the wake of either of 2 or 3 above, I believe Israel could declare the end of major operations. Iran would respond, but from an Israeli and US perspective there would be an endpoint once Fordow is dismantled together with the other main nuclear facilities at Natanz and Isfahan, which are already damaged. Short of the three options laid out above, the most likely course is the crisis simply goes on. That would mean Israel continues to control Iran's airspace. It continues to strike targets. Iran continues to muster barrages at times, but its missile stockpile (and launchers will deplete). This scenario is an inconclusive end with Iran still having massive enrichment capabilities but Israel hovering over Iran to ensure they're never used, as fledgling diplomacy continues in the background. My Assessment: I think at this stage we're most likely to see either option 2 or option 4 even while continuing to do all we can to push for option 1 — the diplomatic resolution. So, given that the preferred endgame is diplomacy, yet with talks going nowhere, how might diplomacy be invigorated over the coming week? First, the United States should make clear the two-week deadline is real and that if Iran refuses to engage constructively, then a strike will be the inevitable result of Iran's own poor choices. That deadline together with a credible offer to Iran — which has been on the table since before the crisis — remains the best possible chance for a diplomatic offramp. Second, is a more creative possibility. Sometimes in a crisis, you want to enlarge the problem set, and here – that means Gaza. The Gaza conflict is ongoing in the background of the Iran crisis. There is now a deal on the table backed by Israel for a 60-day ceasefire in Gaza in exchange for Hamas releasing half the living hostages (10 of 20). Hamas has rejected that deal, but it did so before Israel's attack into Iran and the removal of many of its Iranian backers, such as the leaders of the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps. In my experience with Hamas, it can be far more flexible when its allies have suffered defeats, as happened with the Gaza ceasefire deal earlier this year following Israel's defeat of Hezbollah in Lebanon and a subsequent ceasefire deal in Lebanon. Thus, one idea might be the 60-day ceasefire in Gaza together with a 60-day freeze on enrichment in Iran with an aim to find more permanent solutions at the end of this two-month period. Israel is in such a position of strength it might be amenable to this and the U.S. could help broker it as a means for defusing the broader Middle East crises and in a manner that does not allow Iran or Hamas to regroup. After all, the fastest way to end the horror in Gaza is for Hamas to release just ten hostages, and the fastest way to end the crisis with Iran is for Iran to accept the deal that Witkoff proposed earlier this year. There may be merit in trying these together, particularly as both Iran and Hamas are in their weakest state in years. At bottom, President Trump has bought some time and space with his 'two-week' deadline, together with a preference for a diplomatic resolution. But now three days into that two-week period, there appears to be little momentum on the diplomatic track even as U.S. forces continue their massive buildup in the region.
