Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

MAGA influencers want an Iran deal and for hawks to shut up

Trump is unlikely to pay any political price if he disregards the old guard’s unrealistic demands

By Ben Armbruster | Responsible Statecraft | May 19, 2025

Neocons and their allies in Washington, Israel, and beyond are making unrealistic demands about the outcome of U.S. talks with Iran on limiting its nuclear program. But President Trump has absolutely no reason to listen to them and should not take them seriously.

The anti-Iran deal campaign kicked into overdrive last week when Republicans on Capitol Hill sent a letter to the White House calling on Trump to refuse any agreement that doesn’t include the complete dismantlement of Iran’s nuclear program.

“Every Republican senator except Rand Paul signed a letter to President Trump urging the administration to push for an end to Iran’s enrichment capacity,” Andrew Day, senior editor of the American Conservative, told RS. “They know that this demand is unacceptable to the Iranian regime and are clearly hoping to sabotage Trump’s diplomatic efforts.”

Center for International Policy senior non-resident fellow Sina Toossi called the letter’s demand “a poison pill.”

“Demanding zero enrichment, permanent restrictions, and total dismantlement of Iran’s nuclear infrastructure — after the U.S. already broke the 2015 deal — is not a negotiating position,” he told RS.

Meanwhile, other deal opponents say that Iran can be allowed to keep its program for civilian energy production purposes with the caveat that it cannot enrich its own uranium.

The good news for Trump though — and those who see an opportunity to box in Iran’s nuclear program and avoid war — is that this anti-Iran deal coalition has no constituency outside Washington and Israel, and Trump will pay very little to no political price if he just ignores them.

Take for instance a recent poll conducted by the SSRS Opinion Panel Omnibus in conjunction with the University of Maryland Critical Issues Poll program. That survey found that a large majority of Americans — 69% — favor “a negotiated agreement limiting Iran’s nuclear program to peaceful ends, with stringent monitoring” as opposed to military action. But perhaps more importantly for Trump’s political fortunes, 64% of Republicans surveyed — i.e. his base — agreed.

Opponents of diplomacy with Iran try to obfuscate this reality and muddy the waters. For example, Foundation for the Defense of Democracies CEO Mark Dubowitz — who’s been pushing for regime change in Iran for nearly two decades — promoted a poll last week finding that “76% of Americans say Iran’s nuclear-weapons facilities should be destroyed.”

Of course there is one problem: Iran doesn’t have nuclear weapons or a nuclear weapons program, and thus no nuclear weapons facilities, a fact that the U.S. intelligence community routinely concludes.

But it’s not just the American people or the GOP base that support Trump making a deal with Iran. Some of the more high profile figures in the MAGA-America First world back him too.

“It’s called sanity,” Steve Bannon said last week, referring to the SSRS/UMaryland poll. Bannon, of course, served as a senior adviser to Trump during his first term and remains influential within his orbit and among his supporters.

Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.), who also has clout with Trump’s base, has been very vocal recently against going to war with Iran. “There is no wedge between the base and President Trump,” she said earlier this month. “The wedge is between Congress and the establishment Republicans that are undermining the president’s agenda.”

And conservative media star Tucker Carlson, who like Bannon, has close ties to Trump world and is influential with the president’s base, has been similarly calling out neocons and others who are trying to kill Trump’s diplomacy with Iran and push for war.

“Thousands of Americans would die. We’d lose the war that follows. Nothing would be more destructive to our country,” he said last month. “Anyone advocating for conflict with Iran is not an ally of the United States, but an enemy.”

Popular right-wing podcaster Charlie Kirk has piled on as well. “[T]here are people in Washington inside the Pentagon and inside the administration who want to launch military strikes on Iran. Often, they say it’d be easy. Just one strike in and out,” he said recently. “Now pause. How often have they actually been correct about the one in and out thing? Has that ever actually been the case?”

“President Trump has consolidated his power over the Republican Party to a remarkable degree and could certainly sign a good deal with Iran without suffering politically,” Day said. “The base still loves him, and lawmakers and conservative media are afraid of him. The elites would fall in line for fear of MAGA turning on them.”

Ryan Costello, policy director at NIAC, agrees. “Trump wouldn’t have been elected president twice if his foreign policy echoed the discredited views of the Bush-Cheney wing of the Republican party,” he said. “Trump can have a deal with Iran or he can be pushed into war by adopting rigid and inflexible demands — the vast majority of Americans want him to lead with diplomacy.”

Meanwhile, it appears increasingly unlikely that Democrats — most of whom supported President Obama’s Iran nuclear deal back in 2015 — will try to make much political hay with any agreement Trump makes with Tehran.

“This is not a time for politics on Iran,” Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.), a leading Democratic foreign policy voice in the House, said last week. “I support [Trump] trying to get a deal with Iran. I supported the Obama nuclear deal. How about we put the interest of our nation and peace above scoring political points at every moment?”

And what’s perhaps overlooked but maybe equally important: major regional powers like Saudi Arabia, who campaigned hard against Obama’s Iran deal, have changed their tune with Trump.

“Gulf leaders have been broadly supportive of the talks between the Trump administration and Iran because they don’t want to be caught in the crossfire of a regional escalation if they fail,” Ali Vaez of the International Crisis Group told Middle East Eye last week. “That support doesn’t necessarily translate into success at the negotiating table but it’s a shift from the 2015 talks.”

Perhaps most importantly, Trump can get a deal with Iran that places strict limits on its nuclear program with incredibly intrusive verification mechanisms that will satisfy his stated goal of preventing Iran from building a nuclear weapon, all without zero enrichment provisions or requiring Iran to dismantle its entire program.

“Not only will adopting a hardline ‘no enrichment’ position push Iran from the negotiating table entirely, it is not necessary for an effective agreement and would not fully address Iran’s proliferation risk,” the Arms Control Association’s Kelsey Davenport wrote recently, adding that “dismantling the infrastructure does not erase the knowledge Iran has gained about uranium enrichment.”

In short, she concluded, the U.S. “can find the right combination of limits and monitoring to block Iran’s pathways to nuclear weapons while allowing Iran to retain a less risky level of uranium enrichment.”

Ben Armbruster is the Managing Editor of Responsible Statecraft. He has more than a decade of experience working at the intersection of politics, foreign policy, and media. Ben previously held senior editorial and management positions at Media Matters, ThinkProgress, ReThink Media, and Win Without War.

May 20, 2025 Posted by | Wars for Israel | , , , , | Leave a comment

Iran Nuclear Negotiations Bring New, Suprising Developments

By Ted Snider | The Libertarian Institute | May 20, 2025

In the past several days, there have been surprising developments in the negotiations between Washington and Tehran over Iran’s civilian nuclear program.

U.S. President Donald Trump has frequently, but not always, defined the goal of the negotiations as being limited to preventing Iran from getting a nuclear weapon. He repeated that definition as recently as May 25, saying Iran must “permanently and verifiably cease pursuit of nuclear weapons…They cannot have a nuclear weapon.”

But the message from his team has been contradictory. Then-National Security Advisor Mike Waltz said that the United States is demanding “full dismantlement,” and Trump’s special envoy Steve Witkoff said that “a Trump deal” means “Iran must stop and eliminate its nuclear enrichment and weaponization program.” Rubio said that Iran can have a civilian nuclear program, but by importing uranium enriched up to 3.67%, and no longer by enriching their own. On May 9, Witkoff told Breitbart News that “An enrichment program can never exist in the state of Iran ever again. That’s our red line. No enrichment.”

But Iran has drawn the mirror image red line. Iran’s Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, has placed a firm limit that Iran will not negotiate “the full dismantling of Iran’s nuclear infrastructure.” Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian repeated that red line ahead of the talks, insisting that “Iran has never sought, is not seeking, and will never seek nuclear weapons” but that “Iran will not give up its peaceful nuclear rights.”

American insistence on ending Iran’s civilian enrichment program could put a quick end to the talks. Widening the negotiations to Iran’s missile program or to Iran’s relationship with its regional proxy groups could also jeopardize the talks.

But Trump raised that possibility on May 14 when he suggested that breaking off relations with proxy groups in the region must be part of any deal. Iran “must stop sponsoring terror,” he said, and “halt its bloody proxy wars.”

The contradictory statements emanating from the Trump administration appear to have been “because of a lack of decision on key strategic points,” Trita Parsi, Executive Vice President of Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft and an expert on Iran, told me. And, indeed, on May 7, Trump said, “We haven’t made that decision yet.” 

“As a result,” Parsi said, “the debate on these points is now, rather unhelpfully, taking place out in public.”

That the talks have progressed to a fourth meeting suggests, at this point, that the public crossing of these Iranian red lines may not be being repeated in the private meetings. Iran’s Foreign Minister hinted at that possibility when he identified one of the difficulties in the negotiations as being “contradictions both inside and outside the negotiating room.” Supporting this possibility, when Trump introduced Iran’s support of regional proxies into the discussion, Araghchi called the remark, not unproductive or unhelpful, but “deceitful.”

And Araghchi may know. Barak Ravid of Axios has now reported that, during the fourth round of talks, the United States presented Iran with a written proposal. The report says that, during the third round, Araghchi gave Trump’s special envoy Steve Witkoff a document with Iran’s proposals for a deal. The U.S. studied it and returned it to Iran with “questions and requests for clarifications.” Iran replied, the U.S. prepared a new proposal, and then presented it to Araghchi who has now brought it back to Tehran for consultations with Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei and President Masoud Pezeshkian.

How far down the path to a settlement the proposal is is unknown. Araghchi said future negotiations now become more difficult. But he said that “despite the difficulty and frankness of the talks, very useful discussions were held.” He then said, “We can now say that both sides have a better understanding of each other’s positions.”

This major breakthrough may have been facilitated by another recent development: a subtle change in tone by Trump. Following a flurry of American threats, the fourth round of talks was postponed. Iranian officials said that [d]epending on the U.S. approach, the date of the next round of talks will be announced.”

Recently, that approach subtly changed. Previously, Donald Trump had formulated Iran’s choice as “If they don’t make a deal, there will be bombing. It will be bombing the likes of which they have never seen before.” But in his most recent remarks, which went largely unnoticed, Trump softened the consequence, saying only “If Iran’s leadership rejects this olive branch…we will have no choice but to inflict massive maximum pressure, drive Iranian oil exports to zero.” Notably, bombing was replaced with sanctions.

On May 15, Trump again seemed to reject the risk of war:

“Because things like that get started and they get out of control. I’ve seen it over and over again. They go to war and things get out of control, and we’re not going to let that happen.”

In another surprise development, Iran may have facilitated negotiations with a creative and unexpected proposal.

There are now reports that Iran has suggested for consideration that they could join with Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates in a nuclear enrichment consortium. Iran would continue to enrich uranium but accept a cap at the 3.67% enrichment required by a nuclear energy program. Saudi Arabia and UAE, who would gain access to Iran’s nuclear technology, would be shareholders and funders.

If true, the proposal would be based on a consortium idea first proposed by Princeton physicist Frank von Hippel and former Iranian nuclear negotiator Seyed Hossein Mousavian.

Von Hippel told me that the idea was inspired by the URENCO enrichment consortium of Germany, the Netherlands and Britain and by the ABAAAC consortium of Brazil and Argentina.

The consortiums, he said, allow nuclear experts from each country to “visit each other’s facilities to assure themselves that the activities are peaceful.” He added that “decisions that might have proliferation implications are made by the [partner] governments.” Saudi Arabia’s, the Emirates’ and Iran’s watchful eyes would all help the International Atomic Energy Agency ensure that the program is peaceful.

Aside from the implications for the nuclear negotiations, this level of trust between Iran, Saudi Arabia, and the UAE was unthinkable only a very short time ago and testifies to the changes going on in the region and in the evolving Iran-Saudi Arabia relationship. That Iran would trust Saudi Arabia with access to its nuclear technology indicates that a region changing shift in the relationship is underway.

As Annelle Sheline, research fellow in the Middle East program at the Quincy Institute, told me:

“The Iranians’ willingness to join a consortium with Saudi Arabia and the UAE to develop civilian nuclear energy demonstrates significantly improved relations between these countries. This sends a strong signal that Tehran as well as Riyadh and Abu Dhabi would prefer to prioritize cooperation over conflict.”

She said that all three countries have growing motivation for peace in the region. Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman needs to avoid violent conflict to encourage the foreign investment and tourism needed to fuel his planned economic diversification. Mohammed bin Zayed needs economic security in the face of competition from Saudi Arabia to be a regional hub. Iran needs to encourage peace in the region because of the recent weakening of its own strategic position in the region. Saudi Arabia and Iran have recently been moving towards enhanced friendship both bilaterally and through multinational organizations.

Sheline expressed the hope to me that “Trump should take advantage of these circumstances to sign a nuclear deal with Iran and avoid unnecessary war.”

All of these developments, from the contradictory American messaging, to the until now unreported existence of a written proposal, to the subtle and little noticed change in Trump’s tone to the Iranian idea of a nuclear consortium with Saudi Arabia and UAE are shocking and new. They may present an opportunity to return to a nuclear agreement with Iran and to usher in a new hope for peace and friendly relations both between the U.S. and Iran and in the region. Hopefully, the two sides will seize this opportunity.

May 20, 2025 Posted by | Militarism | , , , , , | Leave a comment

Are US-Israel ‘special relations’ about to end?

By Murad Sadygzade | RT | May 19, 2025

Last week, US President Donald Trump embarked on his first official overseas tour since taking office, choosing to visit three key Gulf nations – Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and the United Arab Emirates.

This itinerary was both unexpected and, in many ways, unprecedented. Unlike his predecessors, who traditionally began their foreign policy engagements with visits to long-standing Western allies, Trump opted to prioritize America’s Arab partners, deliberately bypassing Israel – Washington’s principal strategic ally in the region. This marked the first time in decades that a sitting US president visiting the Middle East consciously excluded it from the agenda.

This decision signaled a potential recalibration of Washington’s priorities in the region. Relations between the Trump administration and the Israeli leadership, particularly Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, were already strained in the early stages – largely due to Israel’s growing intransigence on the Palestinian question and the increasing influence of far-right factions within the Israeli government. Faced with mounting frustration over Israel’s hardline policies, the White House appeared to pivot toward a more pragmatic, less confrontational, and economically advantageous partnership with the Gulf monarchies.

However, the rationale behind this shift extended beyond political calculation. Saudi Arabia, the UAE, and Qatar have long played a pivotal role in sustaining American influence in the Middle East – not only because of their strategic geography but also due to their substantial investments in the US economy and multi-billion-dollar arms contracts. For a business-minded president eager to showcase the profitability of foreign policy through economic deals, these nations represented ideal counterparts.

The lavish receptions afforded to Trump during his Gulf tour might have been dismissed as mere pageantry were it not for their deeper symbolic resonance. The true significance of the visit lay in what it revealed about broader geopolitical currents: namely, the transformation of the Gulf monarchies from regional players into increasingly assertive global actors.

Saudi Arabia, the UAE, and Qatar are no longer content with being perceived as passive participants in American-led regional frameworks. Instead, they are positioning themselves as independent centers of power in an emerging multipolar world order. Their growing international stature stems from several interrelated factors.

First, these countries have embraced ambitious and forward-looking development strategies, investing heavily in infrastructure, clean energy transitions, technological innovation, and global finance. No longer simply hydrocarbon exporters, they are becoming hubs of digital transformation, international logistics, Islamic finance, and global policy discourse on issues ranging from security to sustainable development.

Second, the Gulf states have pioneered a distinctive model of governance that blends traditionalism with modernization. While maintaining deep-rooted commitments to Islamic and tribal values, they have achieved remarkable progress in building diversified and globally competitive economies. This synthesis has not only enabled them to thrive amid intensifying global competition but, in some respects, to outpace certain Western nations grappling with internal divisions and economic stagnation.

Equally noteworthy is the political resilience of these monarchies. Western narratives often portray them simplistically as ‘absolute monarchies,’ failing to appreciate the internal mechanisms of governance that underpin their stability. In reality, the political architecture of the Gulf is more accurately described as ‘sheikhism’ – a system rooted in consensus among tribal and familial elites, structured around a balance of obligations, reciprocal loyalties, and ongoing consultation. This model, which integrates Islamic principles such as shura (consultation) with practical statecraft, has proven remarkably adaptive and resilient.

In this context, Saudi Arabia, the UAE, and Qatar can no longer be viewed merely as privileged US allies or energy suppliers. They are emerging as autonomous actors in global politics – capable of forging regional alliances, shaping international agendas across energy, media, and technology, and mediating in global conflicts. Their evolving role reflects not dependence on external security guarantees, but the outcome of deliberate, long-term strategies to consolidate sovereignty, enhance prestige, and assert influence in the 21st century.

Money above all: Trump’s deal-based diplomacy

President Donald Trump’s visit to the Gulf states was far more than his first foreign trip as head of state. It was a bold, highly symbolic debut of a new US foreign economic doctrine rooted in pragmatism, transactionalism, and strategic capitalism. Unlike previous administrations, which typically foregrounded diplomacy, security alliances, and value-based partnerships, Trump approached this tour as a high-stakes business deal. His mindset was that of a dealmaker, not a traditional statesman. The objective was clear: to restore America’s economic dominance by leveraging the vast wealth and strategic ambitions of the Middle East’s richest monarchies.

Trump’s campaign slogan, “Make America Great Again,” found tangible expression in this tour. His mission was to bring back jobs, reindustrialize key sectors, boost the US high-tech ecosystem, and enhance national competitiveness – all fueled by a surge in foreign direct investment. In this pursuit, the oil-rich, capital-heavy Gulf monarchies – endowed with massive sovereign wealth funds and seeking greater global visibility – emerged as ideal partners.

In Saudi Arabia, Trump signed an unprecedented economic package worth over $600 billion, including the largest arms deal in US history – $142 billion covering missile defense systems, advanced aviation platforms, cybersecurity capabilities, and military-grade AI technologies. Equally significant was the launch of a new tech alliance: Saudi-based DataVolt committed $20 billion to build data centers and energy facilities in the US, while a consortium led by Nvidia, AMD, and Amazon Web Services will co-develop an AI innovation hub within the Kingdom. A $50 billion venture fund was also established to support US-based startups in renewable energy and cybersecurity.

In Qatar, the results were even more staggering: agreements totaling $1.2 trillion, the largest single-country deal package in US diplomatic history. Central to this was Qatar Airways’ order for 210 Boeing aircraft valued at $96 billion, making it the most lucrative deal ever for the American aerospace giant. Qatar also pledged tens of billions of dollars for joint ventures in quantum computing, smart energy networks, and STEM education programs for engineers and IT specialists in the US. In a provocative symbolic gesture, Qatar proposed gifting President Trump a custom-built Air Force One, sparking intense debate in the American media landscape.

In the United Arab Emirates, new agreements totaling $200 billion were signed – in addition to a previously negotiated $1.4 trillion package. Key components included the construction of an aluminum plant in Oklahoma, expansion of oil and gas infrastructure with US firms, and a landmark $100 billion commitment to American companies specializing in artificial intelligence over the next three years.

In total, Trump’s Gulf tour yielded over $2 trillion in contracts and investment pledges – an economic windfall of historic proportions. But beyond the numbers, the trip marked a fundamental redefinition of American foreign policy: from projecting power through military force and ideological alignment, to securing influence through economic penetration and transactional partnerships. Trump unveiled a new image of the US – not as a global policeman, but as a global entrepreneur. A nation that negotiates not with declarations, but with data, contracts, and employment metrics.

This new model resonated deeply with the Gulf monarchies themselves, which are undergoing profound transformations. Once reliant solely on oil exports, these states are rapidly evolving into tech-driven economies with ambitions to become global hubs of innovation, finance, and logistics. In Trump’s America, they found not just a security guarantor, but a strategic co-architect of a post-oil economic order – one where capital, innovation, and mutual profit outweigh traditional diplomatic protocol and ideological rhetoric.

Trump’s message was unambiguous: the era of foreign policy as charity is over. What now matters are mutual returns, strategic alignments, and economic gains. The Gulf states, driven by their own visions of modernization and diversification, eagerly embraced this shift. Together, they reimagined international relations not as a sphere of obligations, but as a marketplace of opportunities.

What about Israel?

One of the most significant – albeit unofficial – outcomes of Donald Trump’s Middle East tour could be discerned even before the journey began: the US President conspicuously bypassed Israel. This omission became all the more striking given that even Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth, who had initially planned a visit to Tel Aviv, abruptly cancelled his trip at the last moment. The message did not go unnoticed in either Washington or Jerusalem: nearly all observers interpreted the move as a clear sign of a cooling relationship between the US and Israel – more precisely, between Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

The rift between the two leaders appears less personal than strategic, rooted in diverging visions of the region’s future. Tensions had been mounting for months. The first major flashpoint came when Trump unilaterally announced the withdrawal of American forces from operations against Yemen’s Houthi rebels, citing the group’s supposed commitment to halt attacks on Red Sea shipping lanes. The decision, made without prior consultation with Israel – which continues to endure daily rocket fire from the Houthis – dealt a blow not only to diplomatic norms but also to the foundational trust between Israel and its closest ally.

An even more sensitive issue has been the quiet resumption of US contacts with Iran. With Oman acting as mediator, Washington has been exploring the outlines of a possible new nuclear agreement. Meanwhile, Israel remains steadfast in its conviction that no negotiations with Tehran should occur until decisive military action is taken against its nuclear and military facilities – a show of force intended to compel concessions. Netanyahu failed to persuade Trump of this hardline approach, and the US president has increasingly charted his own, more flexible course.

Tensions have also sharpened over the future of Syria. Israel refuses to recognize the country’s new leader, Ahmad al-Sharaa, branding him a former al-Qaeda affiliate and a dangerous actor. Israeli airstrikes on Syrian territory continue, the buffer zone in the Golan Heights remains under Israeli control, and the Druze population has formally been placed under Israeli protection. While Israel promotes the vision of a weak, decentralized Syria, Washington is embracing the opposite: al-Sharaa was invited to meet with Trump in Saudi Arabia, and following those talks, the US signaled its intent to lift sanctions on Damascus. Even more striking was the revelation that Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and the UAE – previously restrained by US pressure – are now prepared to invest in Syria’s reconstruction, viewing it as both a stabilizing opportunity and a chance to expand their regional influence.

Israeli frustration has been further stoked by Washington’s evolving stance on the Palestinian issue. Despite Israel’s ongoing military operation in Gaza, Trump has increasingly expressed a desire – even a demand – for a resolution to the conflict. His Gaza reconstruction plan, unveiled in February, sent shockwaves through Washington: it proposed the complete depopulation of Palestinians from the enclave and the transformation of the territory into a luxury international resort zone under US control. Not only was this radical proposal never coordinated with Israel, but it also raised fundamental questions about the future of the US-Israel alliance.

To make matters more complex, credible reports have emerged that the US has been engaged in direct negotiations with Hamas, without informing Israel. The recent release of an American citizen, IDF soldier Idan Alexander, who was captured in October 2023, was reportedly achieved through these covert channels – of which the Israeli government only became aware through its own intelligence services.

Against this backdrop, speculation is growing that the White House is seriously considering formally recognizing an independent Palestinian state. Such a move would not be a mere diplomatic gesture – it would reshape the strategic architecture of the Middle East. Should Washington proceed down this path, Israel could find itself in strategic isolation, while the center of regional gravity shifts toward Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Qatar, and Türkiye – countries with which Trump is building pragmatic, mutually beneficial, and business-driven relations.

None of these states demand unconditional support from Washington, meddle in its internal politics, or leverage domestic crises for influence. More importantly, they offer Trump what he values most: investment, trade, strategic partnership based on reciprocal interest, and freedom from ideological constraints.

Thus, a new geopolitical reality is taking shape before our eyes. In this emerging landscape, Donald Trump appears less inclined to view Israel as an indispensable ally and more drawn to politically agile, economically potent, and regionally assertive actors across the Arab world – and Türkiye. If rumors of Palestinian state recognition prove true, it will mark the end of the long-standing era of “special relations” between the US and Israel and signal the dawn of a new chapter in American Middle East policy – one governed not by ideological loyalty, but by unambiguous political and economic rationality.

Murad Sadygzade is President of the Middle East Studies Center, Visiting Lecturer, HSE University (Moscow).

May 19, 2025 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism | , , , , , , , , | 2 Comments

Iran’s Bold Nuclear Deal 2.0?

By Oleg Burunov – Sputnik – 14.05.2025

After the US unilaterally withdrew from the 2015 Iran nucleal deal in May 2018, subsequent efforts to revive the agreement have largely stalled.

Iran has suggested a joint nuclear enrichment project with US investments and regional Arab nations – Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates.

Iranian FM Abbas Araghchi offered the idea as an alternative to US demand for the dismantling of Iran’s nuclear program during the recent talks with US Special Envoy Steve Witkoff in Oman, the New York Times reports.

Iran would use the venture to enrich uranium to a low grade, beneath the levels needed for nuclear weapons.

Representatives from other countries, including the US, will be on the ground to provide “oversight and involvement.”

May 14, 2025 Posted by | Economics, Nuclear Power | , , | Leave a comment

Israel issues warning over Palestine recognition

RT | May 12, 2025

Israel will respond to any nations who move to unilaterally recognize the state of Palestine, Foreign Minister Gideon Saar has claimed.

Saar issued the warning at a joint press conference with his German counterpart, Johann Wadephul, on Sunday, following announcements by several countries of their intent to recognize Palestine.

The Israeli diplomat claimed that any such unilateral moves would undermine prospects for the peace process and would compel the Jewish state to take measures in response.

Palestine’s sovereignty is recognized by 147 countries, including Russia and the majority of nations in the Middle East, Africa, and Asia. However, most Western European countries, as well as Israel and the US, do not officially consider Palestine a sovereign state. Many nations have advocated for Palestinian recognition as the only way to resolve the Israel-Palestine conflict, which escalated in 2023 when Israel launched a military operation in Gaza following a surprise Hamas attack.

Saar claimed such initiatives were “not constructive but counterproductive” and served “as a prize for Hamas terror.”

Wadephul, however, said that a two-state solution remained “the best chance for Israelis and Palestinians to live in peace, security, and dignity.”

The Media Line news outlet reported on Sunday, citing unnamed diplomatic sources, that US President Donald Trump could formally recognize the state of Palestine at the upcoming Gulf-US summit in Saudi Arabia.

Although US Ambassador to Israel Mike Huckabee has denied any such plans, speculation has grown in the wake of comments Trump made earlier this month in a meeting with Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney. Trump repeatedly hinted at “a very, very big announcement about a certain subject,” which he said would be revealed either before or during his upcoming trip to the Middle East.

Last month, French President Emmanuel Macron indicated that Paris could move to recognize a Palestinian state as early as June, during a United Nations conference in New York.

Russia has long advocated for a two-state solution to the Israel-Palestinian conflict, reaffirming its stance during a recent meeting between Russian President Vladimir Putin and Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas in Moscow. Russia has also called for an immediate end to the violence in Gaza.

May 12, 2025 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism | , , , , | Leave a comment

Iran, Saudi Arabia foreign ministers discuss key bilateral, regional developments

Press TV – May 10, 2025

The top diplomats of Iran and Saudi Arabia met to discuss key issues related to bilateral relations, as well as regional and international developments.

Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi met with his Saudi counterpart, Prince Faisal bin Farhan Al Saud, upon arriving in Jeddah on Saturday. His visit to Saudi Arabia is part of Tehran’s ongoing policy of strengthening ties with neighboring countries.

During the meeting, Araghchi also signed the Saudi Foreign Ministry’s memorial book.

Araghchi urged the Muslim world to take action to confront threats and challenges, including putting an end to the ongoing Israeli genocide in Gaza and preventing a conspiracy to annihilate Palestine in a colonial manner.

The top Iranian negotiator updated his Saudi counterpart on the latest developments regarding the Tehran-Washington indirect talks.

The Iranian and Saudi foreign ministers expressed the two countries’ determination to promote their common goal of expanding mutual relations in all fields.

On Friday, Araghchi announced that the fourth round of indirect talks between Iran and the United States will take place in Oman on Sunday.

His regional tour includes a visit to Qatar later on Saturday as part of his diplomatic engagements.

Speaking in an interview on Friday, Araghchi said his visit to Saudi Arabia would be in line with consultations between the two countries about regional issues and indirect negotiations between Iran and the United States.

He added that since the beginning of the talks in April, Iran has been in constant contact with regional countries to inform them about the process.

“The sustainability of any potential agreement largely depends on the considerations and concerns of the regional countries regarding the nuclear issue and their common interests with the Islamic Republic,” the Iranian foreign minister emphasized.

Mediated by Oman, Iran and the US have held three rounds of talks in the Omani capital of Muscat and the Italian capital of Rome on April 12, 19, and 26, with the aim of reaching a deal on Iran’s nuclear program and the removal of sanctions on Tehran.

Both parties have so far expressed satisfaction with the way the negotiations are moving on, praising the talks as “positive” and “moving forward.”

A fourth round of the talks was scheduled to be held on May 3 in Muscat but was postponed for “logistical and technical reasons,” as cited by the Iranian foreign minister.

May 10, 2025 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Militarism | , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Will Trump recognize a Palestinian State?

Al Mayadeen | May 10, 2025

Gulf analysts wrote in The Media Line on Saturday that Saudi Arabia will host the 2025 Gulf-US Summit in mid-May, aligning with US President Donald Trump’s first visit to the Kingdom in his second term, echoing the huge May 2017 summit in Riyadh during his first term.

All Gulf leaders are expected to attend the summit, except for King Salman bin Abdulaziz, who has remained absent from public engagements due to health concerns.

Ahead of the summit, speculation has grown around what Trump referred to as a “very important announcement” during a recent meeting with Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau at the White House on May 6.

Observers anticipate that the summit could unveil high-level diplomatic shifts, economic agreements, or security deals.

Rumors of US recognition of a Palestinian State

According to The Media Line, the announcement of a Palestinian state is among the most widely discussed possibilities.

Moreover, a Gulf diplomatic source who spoke anonymously to The Media Line said, “President Donald Trump will issue a declaration regarding the State of Palestine and American recognition of it, and that there will be the establishment of a Palestinian state without the presence of Hamas.”

The source added that such an announcement could mark a significant realignment in the region, possibly leading more Arab states to join the normalization agreements.

Additionally, former Gulf diplomat Ahmad al-Ibrahim told The Media Line, “I don’t expect it to be about Palestine. Egyptian President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi and King Abdullah II of Jordan have not been invited. They are the two countries closest to Palestine, and it would be important for them to be present at any event like this.”

It is worth noting that the US is no longer demanding that Saudi Arabia normalize ties with “Israel” as a precondition for advancing civil nuclear cooperation talks, two sources with knowledge of the matter told Reuters, ahead of Trump’s visit to the kingdom.

This marks a significant policy shift by Washington. Under former President Joe Biden, nuclear negotiations with Riyadh were tied to a broader US-Saudi agreement that included recognizing “Israel” and a potential defense treaty with the United States.

Potential economic deals worth billions

Major Saudi economic deals in the 2025 visit may mirror those of the 2017 summit, when agreements worth more than $400 billion were signed, according to The Media Line.

Trump is also expected to visit Qatar and the UAE following his stay in Saudi Arabia, reinforcing speculation of further bilateral and regional economic announcements.

Saudi political analyst Ahmed Boushouki echoed this sentiment, stating, “This is about major economic deals that will take place in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia.

“Perhaps President Donald Trump hinted at this when he told the American people to ‘buy stocks now, before his big announcement in the next two days.’”

According to the report, the summit may reignite discussions on US-Saudi nuclear cooperation. Saudi Arabia has had a peaceful nuclear energy program in place since 2010, and “International companies are now working to implement these projects in Saudi Arabia.”

It is worth mentioning that Saudi Arabia is advancing plans to build its first nuclear reactor, with several global firms competing for the contract, while the UAE’s Barakah plant remains the Arab world’s only operational four-reactor facility, built with South Korea.

May 10, 2025 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism | , , , , , | Leave a comment

US pressures ‘Israel’ for Gaza deal; Witkoff’s Israeli rebuke leaked

Al Mayadeen | May 9, 2025

The administration of US President Donald Trump is reportedly pressuring “Israel” to agree to a ceasefire and a captive deal with Hamas before Trump’s upcoming Middle East visit, according to Haaretz.

An unnamed source familiar with the negotiations stated that the US has warned Israeli officials that if they do not cooperate in advancing such an agreement, “Israel” will be “left alone”, implying a potential withdrawal of US diplomatic support.

The push for a deal comes as the Trump administration seeks to broker a resolution to the ongoing war in Gaza ahead of the president’s regional trip.

A recent report, without citing a specific source, identified Steve Witkoff as the unnamed senior US official referenced in a Channel 12 story earlier this week.

According to that report, the official had criticized “Israel’s” approach to the captive situation during a meeting with the captives’ families, while the nature of the criticism and the full context of the remarks remain unspecified.

The official was quoted as warning: “If until today, the hostages paid the price for not ending the war, then today the price will be much heavier for Israel, and not only the hostages.”

The remarks also criticized “Israel” for failing to leverage the emerging US-Saudi nuclear deal, an agreement that, according to reports, President Trump has reportedly decoupled from the requirement for Saudi Arabia to normalize ties with the Zionist entity.

“If Israel doesn’t come to its senses, the price of missing out will be higher than ever before,” the official, allegedly Witkoff, warned.

Haaretz further reports that Witkoff’s criticism of Netanyahu’s government was deliberately leaked to the media at his request, though his office has since denied that the Trump administration is pressuring “Israel” to reach a deal.

This comes amid an increasingly souring relationship between the United States and “Israel”, which is reportedly leading Trump to pursue US policy in the Middle East while sidelining its “greatest ally in the Middle East”.

The rift between Trump and Netanyahu

Sources close to Trump indicate he is increasingly disappointed with Netanyahu, following reports that Netanyahu has grown frustrated with the US leader, marking a turning point in their relationship as Trump begins to distance his administration from coordination with “Israel” on key Middle East strategies.

Two senior Trump administration officials, in closed conversations relayed to Israel Hayom, revealed that the president has decided to advance regional policy decisions independently rather than waiting for Netanyahu’s input.

Trump aims to strengthen US influence in the region, particularly with Gulf states, and while initial normalization efforts included coordination with “Israel,” the administration now sees Netanyahu’s reluctance, especially his refusal to publicly endorse a “horizon for a Palestinian state”, as a major hindrance.

Trump’s frustration has intensified following reports that Netanyahu and his associates pressured former National Security Advisor Mike Waltz to take military action against Iran, leading to his ousting from the administration on May 3.

Although Netanyahu denies substantial involvement and claims he only spoke to Waltz once, Trump reportedly remains unconvinced and sees this as part of a wider concerning pattern.

May 9, 2025 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Wars for Israel | , , , , , | Leave a comment

A case for a Saudi-US deal, minus the normalisation

By Muhamad Sayuti Mansor | MEMO | May 8, 2025

On the eve of US President Donald Trump’s upcoming trip to the Gulf next week, one of the most hotly debated questions is the fate of the Saudi-Israel normalisation deal under the US-brokered Abraham Accords. Trump himself fuelled speculation on Tuesday, teasing a “very, very big” announcement before his departure. His Middle East envoy, Steve Witkoff, had already hinted at a breakthrough, reinforcing assumptions that normalisation will take centre stage. The real question, however, is how Saudi Arabia will navigate this pressure.

Saudi Arabia is slated to be Trump’s first stop, underscoring its strategic importance to Washington. Trump had intended to make Saudi Arabia his first foreign destination upon returning to office, but that changed with an earlier detour to Rome for the funeral of Pope Francis. Even so, Riyadh marks his first significant diplomatic stop. The symbolism remains: his first foreign trip in 2017 was also to Riyadh. Now, he returns to ink a potential arms deal exceeding $100 billion—an investment package inherited from the Biden era, which sought to advance the same deal as part of a broader push to expand the Abraham Accords.

The Biden administration had made Saudi-Israel normalisation a “national security interest”, imagining it as a cornerstone to unlock economic corridors across the Middle East, South Asia and Africa. After October 2023, the urgency grew. Washington saw normalisation as a way to both reward and rein in Israel, hoping Saudi leverage might induce Israeli concessions, a ceasefire in Gaza, or even progress on Palestinian statehood.

In this regard, the Trump administration shows continuity. Trump’s inner circle—from Jason Greenblatt to Mike Huckabee and Mike Waltz—have all echoed normalisation as a top priority. A team was already mobilized before inauguration, reflecting Trump’s enduring ambition to expand the Abraham Accords and possibly clinch a Nobel Peace Prize. In a recent Time interview, Trump reiterated his belief that Saudi Arabia will join the fold—a rare note of consistency in his otherwise erratic foreign policy.

But are all hopes lost? The answer lies in the Saudi’s court. Normalisation without statehood is a non-starter. Even under less extreme Israeli leadership, real statehood was never on offer. Today, with Gaza in ruins and the overwhelming majority of Saudis opposed, normalisation risks derailing Saudi Arabia’s de-escalation strategy and undermining Vision 2030. Worse still, it benefits only Netanyahu, who seeks political survival by parading normalisation as a victory.

With Trump’s looming Middle East visit already putting Saudi Arabia under immense pressure, Riyadh must now tread a very delicate line. First and foremost, it must clearly identify where its national interests lie. These are all concentrated in the first half of the proposed deal: a US-Saudi strategic alliance agreement, defence cooperation, deeper trade and investment ties, and crucially, US support for Saudi’s civilian nuclear programme.

This nuclear partnership could allow the Kingdom to build the infrastructure and expertise necessary to become a nuclear-latency state—on par with Germany, Japan, Canada and most importantly, Iran. These are serious, long-term strategic gains. Meanwhile, the second half of the deal—normalisation with Israel—offers Saudi Arabia very little of tangible value.

So why not pursue the former without the latter? Pending the best-case scenario—Israel’s irrevocable commitment to Palestinian statehood—Saudi Arabia should press ahead with securing the US security and economic package, minus normalisation.

Is that even possible? The second thing to recognise is that the Trumpian world offers both challenge and opportunity. Despite Trump’s self-proclaimed status as “the greatest friend Israel ever had in the White House”, there has never been a wider gap between Israel and the US than now. And Trump is clearly the one calling the shots.

There are ample signs of this shift. The very fact that the US is in talks with Iran—against Israel’s wishes—is one. Another was Trump’s decision to proceed with the withdrawal of US troops from northeast Syria, despite Israeli concerns about Turkish influence there. More recently, US is reported to consider lifting sanctions on Damascus—again, over Israeli objections. Observe too how he made a ceasefire deal with the Houthis without even informing the Israelis.

Perhaps the most telling sign came during US Energy Secretary Chris Wright’s April visit to Riyadh, where he confirmed progress on a Saudi-US nuclear agreement. What he did not mention was normalisation with Israel. This omission speaks volumes.

To take advantage of this opening, Saudi Arabia must understand and work with Trump’s transactional mindset. Business comes first. In his first term, Trump openly celebrated arms sales to Saudi Arabia, boasting of $110 billion in promised purchases. He even admitted choosing Riyadh over London as his first foreign visit in 2017 because of the scale of the deal.

Trump 1.0 also saw his administration strive to approve nuclear technology transfers to Saudi Arabia, bypassing Congress in the process. All this suggests that even Trump privately sees the core value of the deal in its economic and strategic dimensions, and not in Israeli normalisation.

Trump’s transactionalism extends beyond simple cash flow. Saudi Arabia can offer to deepen its defence partnership with the US, while keeping competitors like China, Russia, or even the UK and France at arm’s length. Despite America’s shale boom, Washington still relies on Gulf oil to fuel economic growth, while Saudi Arabia depends on stable prices to fund its budget. If the US expects Riyadh to offset Iranian oil cuts, security guarantees must follow.

Saudi Arabia can also leverage its financial clout. It is already pulling back financially, cutting $5 billion in US FDI since 2019 and slashing its US stock holdings by 41 per cent in 2024. Riyadh is now shifting focus to Africa and Latin America. If Washington wants to reverse that trend, it must offer Saudi Arabia robust support, including a green light for its nuclear ambitions. That’s a win-win, without normalisation.

Besides cajoling the US, a dose of reality may be healthy. Saudi Arabia must make one thing clear to Washington: if the US won’t support Riyadh’s post-oil nuclear ambitions, others will. France, South Korea, and especially China have already offered assistance. By tying nuclear cooperation to normalisation, Washington risks forfeiting oversight and influence over a growing Saudi nuclear programme. That would be a strategic blunder.

Despite Trump’s bluster about forcing Saudi Arabia to normalise ties, Riyadh can take comfort in the way Trump often repackages minimal foreign concessions into “historic” US wins. If managed shrewdly, even a scaled-down deal—without normalisation—could still be framed as a diplomatic triumph by the Trump White House.

Ultimately, everything hinges on Saudi leadership and diplomatic finesse. History shows that, on rare but significant occasions, the “Arab lobby” has outmanoeuvred the formidable Israel lobby. If Riyadh can pull this off again, it won’t just secure a strategic alliance with the US, it will also cement its role as a regional leader. Just as importantly, it will send a powerful message to Israel: it is no longer at the centre of the universe, not even America’s.

May 8, 2025 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism | , , , , | Leave a comment

Defiant Trump advances US plans without Israeli approval: Report

The Cradle | May 8, 2025

US President Donald Trump has lost patience with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and will not wait any longer for Israel before advancing initiatives in West Asia, Israel Hayom reported on 8 May.

According to two senior sources in the US President’s entourage, Trump is interested in making decisions that he believes will advance US interests, particularly regarding Saudi Arabia and the Gulf states, without waiting for approval from Netanyahu.

Regarding a potential US–Israeli agreement with Saudi Arabia, Trump believes Netanyahu is delaying making the necessary decisions. The president is not willing to wait until Israel does what is expected of it and will move forward without it.

During the presidency of Joe Biden, the US and Israel were involved in talks with Saudi Arabia that would see Washington enter a defense pact with the kingdom, provide it with civilian nuclear technology, and sell it advanced weapons – all in exchange for normalization with Israel.

As part of any agreement to normalize relations with Israel, Saudi Arabia expects an end to the war in Gaza and an Israeli declaration of a “horizon for a Palestinian state.”

However, senior ministers in Israel’s current government have vowed to never allow a Palestinian state in the occupied West Bank, while promising to “destroy” Gaza, ethnically cleanse its population under the pretext of promoting “voluntary migration,” and to build Jewish settlements there.

The sources added that Trump was furious at what he saw as an attempt by Netanyahu to use US National Security Advisor Mike Waltz, who has since been dismissed from his position, to push for US military action in Iran.

Netanyahu claimed in response to the publication of the affair in the Washington Post that he had only spoken to Waltz once. However, Trump was not convinced.

The president’s anger likely explains why Trump did not involve Israel in the ceasefire he announced with the Ansarallah-led government of Yemen.

Even after Trump announced the agreement with Yemen, Israeli representatives handling relations with the US were reportedly unable to receive information from White House officials about what was happening for a day, Israel Hayom noted.

Additionally, Trump is not currently scheduled to visit Israel as part of his visit to the region next week.

The disconnect between Trump and Netanyahu likely explains why the Israeli prime minister and his Defense Minister, Israel Katz, announced on Wednesday that they are prepared for a situation in which Israel will be left alone in the campaign against Yemen.

Defense Minister Katz said that “Israel must be able to defend itself on its own against any threat and any enemy. This has been true in the face of many challenges in the past and will continue to be so in the future.”

Trump has faced criticism for escalating the war against Yemen since taking office in January, including for withholding information about US military casualties resulting from a military campaign that has never received authorization from Congress.

The operation has involved over 1,000 US airstrikes against the Ansarallah-led Yemeni Armed Forces (YAF) and killed hundreds of Yemenis, including many civilians.

Writing for Haaretz, Israeli journalist Aluf Benn notes that each time US presidents have been angered by Tel Aviv’s actions, “Israel stood its ground, deflected the pressure and over time got what it wanted.”

Benn stated that Trump is also pursuing a deal with Iran over its nuclear program that is contrary to Netanyahu’s position on the matter.

Trump pulled the US out of the Obama-era Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) in 2018 amid encouragement from Netanyahu. However, the president has been trying to come to a diplomatic understanding with Iran to halt the development of its nuclear program during his second term.

Three rounds of talks have taken place, mediated by the government of Oman and involving Trump’s special envoy to the region, Steve Witkoff.

May 8, 2025 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Wars for Israel | , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Saudi Arabia tells ICJ Israel considers itself above all laws

MEMO | April 30, 2025

A representative of Saudi Arabia told the International Court of Justice (ICJ) yesterday that Israel considers itself above all laws and refuses to comply with the court’s advisory opinion on halting its aggression against the Gaza Strip.

Mohamed Saud Alnasser, who is the director of legal affairs at the kingdom’s Foreign Ministry, condemned Israel’s “flagrant violations of international law” in the occupied West Bank and East Jerusalem, as well as Gaza, adding that Tel Aviv’s unjustified blockade on Gaza, reflects brutality against civilians in the besieged Strip.

“Less than a year ago, the court heard that Israel’s policies and practices in the occupied territory, including its settlement practices, its continued occupation and its annexation of parts of that territory are flagrant violations of international law that must be brought to an end as a matter of urgency,” he said.

“Sadly, but predictably, Israel chose to ignore the court’s ruling, showing it considered itself above the law.”

Alnasser referred to Israel’s “hideous conduct” in Gaza, adding that the “most ruthless application has been the siege conditions imposed over the Gaza Strip since October 2023,” and that the worsening situation there has turned the Strip into a graveyard for thousands of innocent people

Alnasser stressed that preventing the entry of relief supplies into Gaza is a violation of all international conventions, calling on Israel to facilitate the work of humanitarian organisations, especially the United Nations Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA), in Gaza and the West Bank.

He explained that the International Commission of Inquiry had disproved the Israeli allegations against UNRWA employees, and called for protection for workers in humanitarian agencies and organisations in the occupied Palestinian territories from Israeli violations.

April 30, 2025 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, War Crimes | , , , | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »