Middle East

Iran: JD Vance and Abass Araghtchi, the new strong men of the negotiation

JD Vance was not at the White House on February 11. However, that day, Benjamin Netanyahu asked to be able to give Donald Trump and his team a presentation on screen. Objective: explain why it became imperative to attack Iran. The vice president was in Azerbaijan. The meeting having been scheduled at the last minute, Vance did not have time to return. This was not the first time that Benjamin Netanyahu visited the United States to make this type of presentation. According to former Secretary of State John Kerry, similarly, “Netanyahu wanted to persuade Barack Obama, who refused. Joe Biden too. George Bush also refused. The only one who accepted was Donald Trump. »

THE New York Times precisely traces this moment when the American president decided to put his country and Israel on the path to a major armed conflict, in the heart of one of the most unstable regions in the world. Nothing says that if Vance had been there it would have been different. After all, the demonstration was based on the principle of a short war leading to the fall of the regime through an uprising of the population. In support, David Barnea, head of Mossad, appeared on the screen. According to his service, Iranian society was ripe for change. He just needed a helping hand. Iran’s ballistic missile program would be wiped out within weeks. The regime would be so weakened that it could not block Hormuz.

The likelihood of Iran harming U.S. interests in neighboring countries was deemed minimal. The Israelis also raised the option of Iraqi Kurdish fighters trained by them crossing the Iranian border, which would stretch the regime’s forces and accelerate its collapse. Some of the arguments went against recommendations made to Trump by his chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, General Dan Caine, including the issue of threats to poorly protected US bases located in allied countries. But the president seems to agree with the point of view of the Israeli Prime Minister.

Hostility to long interventions

When Benjamin Netanyahu finishes his presentation, Donald Trump has only one comment: “That suits me. » An argument from the Prime Minister seems to have hit the mark: “The risks of inaction are greater than those of action. » The next day, Trump’s team meets for a debrief. This time, JD Vance is present. According to the New York Times always, from CIA Director John Ratcliffe to Secretary of State Marco Rubio, everyone finds the idea of ​​a collapse of the regime “grotesque”. Trump asks Dan Caine for his opinion, who tells the president: “Sir, in my experience this is standard Israeli procedure. They overdo it and their plans are not always well developed. They know they need us, that’s why they insist so much. » Vance remains in his corner, without commenting.

The demonstration was based on the principle of a
short war

Everyone knows their hostility to long and costly military interventions. On Ukraine, he refused to vote for military aid, even at the beginning, when Democrats and Republicans joined their votes, flower in hand. Deep down, having perceived the impression made on Trump by Netanyahu, he knows that the president has made his decision. He doesn’t want to give the impression of betraying him by putting forward too many hostile arguments. In the White House these days, we only report good news to the president, otherwise he gets angry. So, Vance thought, we might as well persuade him to take only a limited action. The vice president speaks out to call the war against Iran a “considerable waste of resources” and of “potentially extremely expensive”. He mentions the risks of regional chaos and the number of victims. Above all, he warns the president that his Maga base will feel betrayed in the event of a major commitment. Vance saw it all, even Hormuz, emphasizing the considerable advantage Iran would have by seizing the strait.

Also, when Donald Trump, after more than a month of war and after promising the apocalypse to Iran, declared a cease-fire, crude oil prices plummeted. But as soon as the USA walks away from the negotiation, “Bibi” demonstrates its refusal to stop by shelling Lebanon, oil starts to rise again. Infernal… On the other side of the world, a man has perfectly understood that oil will be the negotiating thermometer. His name is Abbas Araghtchi. Along with Mohammad Ghalibaf, the Speaker of Parliament, the Minister of Foreign Affairs of Iran is among the rare survivors of the terrible campaign to decapitate the Iranian regime organized by the Israelis.

“If the United States wants to collapse its economy by letting Netanyahu kill diplomacy, that will ultimately be its choice. We think it would be stupid, but we are prepared for it”he explains. The Israelis have just struck Lebanon, causing the death of 300 people on Wednesday alone. The talks are uncertain. A sign that times have changed, the Iranians tolerate the presence of previous negotiators Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner, but they want JD Vance to lead the negotiations. Trump also agrees to return its frozen assets in Qatar to Iran. A sum of six billion dollars which looks like a gesture of goodwill.

That’s not all. Iran has also designated the host country for the same negotiations. After long negotiations behind the scenes, Pakistani Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif has just raised Pakistan very high on the map of world diplomacy. Iran was the first country to recognize the country in 1947. This country with which Iran shares 900 kilometers of borders and which speaks as much to Washington as to Beijing will have understood that the regional chaos which has affected eleven countries in all risks spreading even further. Hence the urgent need to stop the fire.

Pakistan was known for its collusion with terrorist networks or its support for the Taliban. This is also where Osama bin Laden established his final resting place, in Abbottabad, a few kilometers from the Pakistani Saint-Cyr… This “bad buzz” will have made us forget that Islamabad negotiated in its time the withdrawal of Soviet troops from Afghanistan, or even the rapprochement between Washington and Beijing during the era of Richard Nixon. Iran and Pakistan therefore find themselves redrawing, each in their own way, the contours of a Middle East where America’s influence will decrease and where, with Iranian control of the Strait of Hormuz, the world economy will change shape. An upheaval.

The two delegations meet in Islamabad

Once again on Friday, the holding of the talks was uncertain. Finally, Donald Trump, then Steve Witkoff, will have convinced Benjamin Netanyahu to moderate his strikes on Lebanon and to open negotiations with Lebanon next week in Washington. The two delegations therefore meet in Islamabad. They are large, an encouraging sign that no one came for nothing. No direct negotiations though. We will go through the Pakistani mediator. No photos together either. Both camps are suspicious of each other. Iran’s red lines include the Strait of Hormuz, payment of war reparations, release of blocked Iranian assets and a region-wide ceasefire. Those of the Americans revolve around nuclear power and the reopening of Hormuz. The chances of success are uncertain. But by setting foot in Islamabad, JD Vance knows that above all he has the difficult task of restoring America’s image in the world, and that of Trump among his voters.