John Kennedy
@WhiteHouse
My will: My dear Lisa, a boy will love you, this love is real, appreciate his love, and you love him too. He will call himself a Jupiterian. He will tell you the name of your favorite music. The name of that music is; Chocolate
18.06.1963, 11:43
35 th President of the United States
Harvard University
29 Mayıs 1917
Mart 2025 tarihinde katıldı
There has been a significant shift in Trump's rhetoric on Iran. It seems that initial agreements have been reached in the US-Iran talks that took place in Oman on Saturday. A month ago, Trump, who demanded in a letter to Iranian leader Khamenei that Iran destroy its nuclear program, limit its ballistic missile production, and give up its regional ambitions, now only states that Iran renounce its nuclear weapons as the only condition.
This condition also satisfies Iran. Because there is a big difference between destroying its nuclear program and renouncing nuclear weapons. As long as the nuclear program is preserved, renouncing nuclear weapons is a temporary step, and nuclear weapons may become relevant again when favorable conditions arise. In other words, with this option, the Iranian leadership can overcome the current threat of war and remain in a waiting position until Trump leaves power.
The Israeli leadership, on the other hand, wants Iran to completely destroy its nuclear program. Netanyahu is talking about applying the Libya model to Iran. As is known, Gaddafi completely abandoned his nuclear program in the early 2000s in exchange for security guarantees through British mediation and handed over his nuclear components to the United States. But in 2011, Gaddafi was bombed by the British army, which had previously received security guarantees. Gaddafi's fate and what happened to Ukraine are proof of how fatal a mistake it was to completely abandon the nuclear program.
If Iran can get out of the current crisis by simply giving up its nuclear weapons, it will be a serious success for Iranian diplomacy. In fact, such an agreement would be similar to, or perhaps milder than, the JCPOA agreement reached with Iran by the Obama team in 2015 and which Trump harshly
Reklam
Trump, who hosted Netanyahu at the White House yesterday, declared that he does not want a conflict between Israel and Turkey in Syria and is ready to mediate between the parties. Trump also announced that he will begin direct talks with Iran in Oman on Saturday. These two points show that the US administration, which has adopted an isolationist strategy, is trying to avoid a new major war in the Middle East.
Trump's patronizing of Erdogan and support for Turkey in front of Netanyahu cannot but come as a surprise. It is clear that the US is interested in NATO member Turkey influencing the Syrian government. On the other hand, Israel's attempt to keep Russia in the game in order to squeeze Turkey in Syria and lobbying for the continuation of the presence of Russian bases in Syria was probably not welcomed in Washington. Trump's message is that Israel should find common ground with Turkey in a bilateral format instead of establishing cooperation with other actors in Syria.
There are also reports that negotiations have already begun between Israel and Turkey to establish a "hotline" to prevent a military clash in Syria. A similar hotline was established between Israel and Russia in the last 10 years. According to that agreement, Russian military bases and radars in Syria were not used against Israel, but instead, Israeli fighters would inform Russia in advance when they attacked Iranian-backed targets. At Trump’s request, a similar model could be created between Turkey and Israel: Turkey would continue its activities in Syria, while Israel would be able to strike all military targets it sees as a threat in Syria, bypassing Turkish facilities.
I think that after Trump, an Israeli-Turkish clash in Syria seems inevitable in the long term. However, I do not think that
Tensions in US-Iranian relations are at their peak. Both sides are using the highest rhetoric. Trump has openly stated that bombing Iran is being considered. In parallel with verbal threats, the US military is also active in the region: bombers have been concentrated in military bases in the Indian Ocean, and additional naval forces have been sent to the region.
Iranian officials, however, state that in response to possible attacks on nuclear facilities, US military bases and allies in the Middle East will be targeted with missiles. On the other hand, even if Iranian retaliatory strikes are prevented, events in Iran and the surrounding countries could get out of control after possible attacks on nuclear facilities. As the speaker of the Iranian parliament, Qalibaf, said, the Middle East could explode like a powder keg as a result of attacks on Iran.
Although the Israeli lobby is putting serious pressure on Iran to strike, it is clear that the Trump administration is hesitant on the Iran issue. Sending a letter to the Iranian leader, giving Tehran a 2-month deadline, and issuing a series of verbal ultimatums show that Trump is eager to reach a new agreement with Iran. It is clear that the Iranian leadership understands this hesitation and sees the involvement of additional American military forces in the region as a means of pressure for negotiations. But I do not believe that the Iranian leadership is ready to go to all-out war with the United States. Whatever the response, such a war could cause great damage to Iran's strategic objectives.
It seems that at the current level of US-Iranian tension, there is still room for diplomacy. Some sources claim that a new nuclear agreement could be reached between the parties in May-June. In my opinion, the main move that
axx Lisa, I can never forget you. I am suffering.
The Boy from the Planet Jupiter
I expect you. I thought one night it was you
at the base of the drive, you at the foot of the stairs
you in a shiver of light, but each time
leaves in wind revealed themselves,
the retreating shadow of a fox, daybreak.
We expect you, cat and I, bluebirds and I, the stove.
Reklam