Teresa Dougherty, APR

Iran reopens Hormuz: Are Tehran and Washington getting closer to a deal? 🔹 Since yesterday, multiple developments suggest Tehran and Washington may be inching toward a deal. But rather than a breakthrough moment, what we may be seeing is a carefully staged, incremental process. 🔹 Starting with Lebanon, Israel’s agreement to a ceasefire there aligns with a key Iranian demand that any U.S.-Iran arrangement extend across the region, including the Hezbollah front. 🔹 This linkage was initially rejected by Israel, which escalated operations in Lebanon to preserve freedom of action. The shift toward a ceasefire likely reflects external pressure from the U.S., involving mediation by Pakistan and others. 🔸 One interpretation is that Donald Trump ultimately pushed Benjamin Netanyahu to accept the ceasefire to remove a major Iranian red line and enabling diplomatic movement. 🔸Iranian sources suggest Tehran made it explicit that no second round of talks with the U.S. while Lebanon remained active. Some accounts go further, saying that Iran had warned it would resume strikes, including against Israel, if no ceasefire emerged. 🔸Publicly, Trump denies any linkage between Lebanon and Iran talks. But it is difficult to see the ceasefire as entirely disconnected from progress on the diplomatic track. 🔹 A second signal is that Iran has reopened the Strait of Hormuz to shipping. 🔹 Trump frames this as proof that his pressure campaign is working, insisting the naval blockade will remain until a comprehensive deal is reached. 🔹 But a different reading is more plausible: both sides may be constructing a sequence that allows for de-escalation without visible concession. Step 1: ceasefire in Lebanon. Step 2: Iran reopens Hormuz. Step 3: gradual rollback of U.S. naval pressure. 🔹 Crucially, the “blockade” itself may never have been fully enforced. Shipping data suggests Iranian vessels continued transiting the Strait, pointing to a signaling tool rather than a total economic cutoff. 🔹 In that sense, the blockade functions less as a coercive end-state and more as diplomatic leverage, allowing Washington to claim success while moving toward compromise. 🔸At the same time, Iran’s move appears to be highly conditional. Iranian FM says shipping is allowed, but only along routes designated by Tehran, close to its shores. 🔸This is significant, as it preserves Iran’s operational control and its ability to quickly reimpose restrictions if conditions change. 🔸Iranian state media outline three conditions: • Only commercial shipping permitted • No U.S./Israeli-linked vessels or cargo • Full coordination with Iranian forces 🔸In other words, what they say is that the Strait is open, but on Iran’s terms. 🔸Tehran is also signaling that the arrangement is reversible. If the U.S. maintains or intensifies its naval pressure, Iran could shut the Strait again. 🔹 Another key point is that Iranian sources reject Trump’s claim that Tehran agreed to hand over highly enriched uranium, saying that the issue remains unresolved. 🔹 This suggests that what we are seeing is not a finalized agreement, but partial implementation of a previously negotiated framework, i.e., the initial ceasefire mediated by Pakistan. 🔹 According to Iranian accounts, the delay was due to Lebanon. Once that front was included, the framework could move forward. 🔸But not everyone in Iran is on board. The reopening of Hormuz appears to have surprised parts of the political elites, triggering criticism from hardliners. 🔸Their concern is that restoring shipping too quickly reduces economic pressure on adversaries, undermining Iran’s leverage. 🔸Others focus on messaging, arguing that even if the move is conditional, inconsistencies in public communication have allowed Washington to dominate the narrative. 🔸This is a key point in their view, as the U.S. can now portray developments as evidence that its pressure campaign worked, even if the outcome reflects mutual compromise. ➡️Overall, it seems that what’s unfolding is not so much of a decisive breakthrough but a managed de-escalation, structured to let both sides claim success while keeping options open.

Deeply reported story by @maggieNYT and @jonathanvswan about an extraordinary pitch/presentation Netanyahu made to convince Trump to go to war with Iran, including catastrophically wrong Israeli assumptions about how easy it would be to win.