Tag: iran negotiations
Kushner and Witkoff

How Kushner And Witkoff, Dimbulb Diplomats, Failed Utterly In Iran Talks

Two of U.S. President Donald Trump's close allies, special envoy to the Middle East Steve Witkoff and the president's son-in-law Jared Kushner, have been key players in negotiations with Iran during a war that has lasted for six and one-half months. But a former White House official, according to The New Yorker, is highly critical off their performance, saying they are committing "total malpractice."

In The New Yorker, reporter Derek Filkins explains, "In the waning hours before the U.S. went to war with Iran, this February, Jared Kushner held a meeting with Iranian negotiators in Geneva — one last chance to avoid a conflict that would plunge the region into chaos and shock the world economy. Afterward, Kushner dismissed his counterparts as unworthy of his time. 'Lots of tricks,' he told reporters. 'They're basically playing games with us all over the place, and it's very, very slippery.'"

Filkins continues, "Kushner, the boyish-looking son-in-law of Donald Trump, has been given an extraordinary brief in recent years. Along with Steve Witkoff, the president's special envoy, he has been charged with ending wars in Gaza, Ukraine, and just about anywhere else they might break out. Kushner, who is 45, has little regard for the craft of diplomacy."According to New Yorker sources, Kushner and Witkoff dropped the ball badly when it came to negotiations with Iran.

Filkins reports, "A former diplomat briefed on the talks with Iran told me that, when the Iranian foreign minister, Abbas Araghchi, began offering concessions, the two Americans failed to grasp precisely what was on the table. They sought advice from Rafael Grossi, the head of the International Atomic Energy Agency, but Grossi was attending the talks as a neutral party. A former White House official who worked on the Iranian nuclear issue was aghast at the lack of preparation: 'The Iranians come to you with a proposal. What does it actually mean? How much does it actually set them back — two months or two years? What are the work-arounds? For them not to have technical advisers there is just total malpractice."

Filkins reports that at another press conference, Kushner "argued that the Iranians were merely stalling."

According to the reporter, "'They were just trying to buy time in order to preserve whatever they could, to get past the term of President Trump,' he said. Another former White House official I spoke to largely shared that assessment. 'It was the same old game,' he said. 'The Iranian position is: We get a s–– ton of sanctions relief, and we do nothing to dismantle our nuclear infrastructure.' But some experts who followed the talks thought that Araghchi’s proposals were made in earnest. Among other things, the Iranians were offering to suspend nuclear enrichment entirely, which they had not done before, and to dilute the enriched uranium that they still retained."

Virginia Canter, a former White House counsel, is also highly critical of Kushner's handling of Iran negotiations.Canter told The New Yorker, "Kushner is plagued with conflicts of interest. He is supposed to be working for the American people, but in fact, he has tremendous financial incentives to further the interests of his investors."

Reprinted with permission from AlterNet

Trump's Fox News Cabinet Fractures Over How (Or Whether) To End War

Trump's Fox News Cabinet Fractures Over How (Or Whether) To End War

With U.S.-Iranian negotiations stuck in purgatory, the hawkish hosts and contributors whom President Donald Trump listens to at Fox News have been weighing in on a potential peace deal. While the group was united in urging Trump to launch the war, it is now fracturing over whether or how to bring the conflict to an end.

Prime-time Fox star and full-time Trump propagandist Sean Hannity is ready to brand any agreement the president makes as a victory. But contributors Jack Keane and Marc Thiessen and Fox & Friends co-host Brian Kilmeade are all calling for further military escalation if Iran won’t agree to Trump’s maximalist demands in exchange for minimal returns. And host Mark Levin has suggested that any negotiation that leaves Iran’s regime in place is a failure for the U.S.

Axios reported Thursday on purported progress toward an agreement to end the three-month-old war between the U.S. and its ally Israel against Iran, the latest reiteration of a familiar pattern. “U.S. and Iranian negotiators have reached an agreement on a 60-day memorandum of understanding to extend the ceasefire and launch negotiations on Iran's nuclear program, but President Trump has yet to give his final approval,” the outlet’s Barak Ravid reported.

Trump subsequently met with top aides on Friday for a two-hour meeting in the Situation Room but “did not reach a decision on any new deal.” Since then, the U.S. and Iran have reportedly traded new negotiating points and military strikes.

The president regularly shapes national policy based on what he sees on Fox, and he leaned on the network in deciding to go to war in the first place and over the subsequent months. But a social media post Trump issued just after 1 a.m. ET on Monday may suggest some frustration with the Fox Cabinet members whose counsel he typically seeks.

Trump, in that post, promised that Iran would agree to a “good” deal and said that unnamed “political hacks” should “just sit back and relax” rather than telling him to “move faster, or move slower, or go to war, or not go to war, or whatever.”

(Iran’s state media reported hours later that “Iranian negotiators will stop exchanging messages with the U.S. through intermediaries in retaliation for ongoing ceasefire violations” and its forces would again fully close the Strait of Hormuz.)

Hannity predicts “a major geopolitical win”

Hannity has torn up every media ethics rule in the book as he pursues his dual role of Fox host and Trump political operative. A longtime friend and confidant of the president, he has at times been so influential White House aides described him as the “the ‘shadow’ chief of staff.” Trump reportedly cited commentary from “Sean” in internal deliberations with U.S. officials in the lead-up to the war.

The Fox propagandist is cheering on any prospective deal as a significant Trump victory — and preparing his audience to do the same.

Hannity opened his Friday show by announcing “terrible news for Democrats who are limping into the midterms: President Trump is now poised for a major geopolitical win in Iran. News of a significant deal is already driving down dramatically the price of oil while sending the stock market to one record high after another after another.”

Later in the program, Hannity touted the president’s negotiating abilities and Iran’s purportedly weak position.

“They're in desperate need of cash and one of the things the president is saying is you don't get any of your own money or to sell anything until we get the dust, the strait is open, the mines are removed, and if it doesn't work, I'm just going to blow you to smithereens,” he said, adding, “I don't think the president I would hesitate a moment if he felt the deal was falling apart.”

Keane, Kilmeade, Thiessen: “We can go back to military operations” if Iran doesn’t bend

Trump has consulted Keane, a retired Army general and Fox senior strategic analyst who sits on the boards of multiple defense contractors, and Thiessen, a Washington Post columnist and Fox contributor, about the Iran war, according to an April Axios report. Kilmeade, meanwhile, is the senior co-host on Fox & Friends, the Fox morning show that shapes Trump’s worldview.

Keane frequently calls for further military escalation against Iran in his Fox appearances, and he stressed last week the need to return to full-scale military operations rather than accepting an agreement that fails to meet the maximalist

“No matter what deal we put together, at the end of it, they are going to want to recover everything that they're losing and go back to their original goal,” he said on Friday’s Fox & Friends. “So, in the deal … we have got to have the provisions in there to prevent as much of that as possible from happening.”

He further suggested that “we can go back to military operations” if Iran did not agree to relinquish “fees” and “the implication” it controls the Strait of Hormuz, as well as “all” its uranium stockpile “regardless of the percentage” of enrichment, while receiving no “money upfront” in sanctions relief.

Likewise, when Kilmeade interviewed Thiessen on Monday, the pair touted Trump’s demands while mocking the Iranian responses as unrealistic.

Thiessen emphasized that providing Iran with access to money should be a nonstarter, saying that “the big problem with even a good deal” in which “we get the nuclear dust, we end their nuclear program, and possibly even get the Arab states to join the Abraham Accords” is that “if we give them money, it gives a lifeline to the regime.”

Each pointed to escalations the U.S. could take in place of accepting a negotiated settlement, with Thiessen saying that “we can open the strait by force if we want to” while Kilmeade suggested “we could stop them getting resupplied through land.”

Mark Levin: Iran won’t honor any “paper agreement,” and its regime “must be destroyed”

Levin reportedly helped bring about the June 2025 U.S. strikes on Iran’s nuclear facilities by convincing the president over a lunch at the White House that the country was just days away from getting a nuclear weapon. Trump has urged the public to watch Levin’s program for the host’s commentary on the U.S.-Iran war.

Levin typically lavishes Trump with praise for his decision to attack Iran — but as the network’s most hawkish figure on the war, he wants it to end with Iranian regime change, not a deal.

“Our government needs to understand that no paper agreement, no matter how good the terms seem, will in the end be honored by this enemy,” he explained on Sunday night’s Fox show, which aired hours before Trump posted on social media.

“The Iranian regime is at war with us, whether we like it or not,” Levin later added. “They are at war with us whether we are at war with it, whether we sign agreements with it as we have in the past, and there is nothing that’s going to change it. Nothing!”

“Let me repeat, nothing — except its destruction,” he continued. “That’s it. This is why, in my view, it must be destroyed, where I feel it will never be destroyed, least not with some great, massive military operation, the kind of which we do seek to avoid.”

Levin concluded his monologue by describing Trump as “a courageous man, he's a moral man, and he cares passionately and compassionately about us, his fellow Americans. What I know is that he loves our country, and he will do the very best he can to safeguard it. That I do know, and that allows us to sleep at night.”

Iran War: Ceasefire Deadlines May Come And Go, But TACO Is Forever

Iran War: Ceasefire Deadlines May Come And Go, But TACO Is Forever

Wednesday is the big day when President Donald Trump’s two-week shambles of a ceasefire deal with Iran was supposed to expire. And as you can expect, the administration moved with all due haste to ensure that this needless war gets resolved.

Okay, that’s a lie—and we all know it. Instead, Trump dragged his feet, issuing threats that he wouldn’t extend the ceasefire and declaring on social media that “Iran has Violated the Cease Fire numerous times!”

Then, after puffing out his chest all day, he decided late Tuesday to extend that ceasefire indefinitely for reasons only known to him.

Turns out Trump didn’t need our lead negotiator, the absolutely hapless and congenitally unlikeable Vice President JD Vance, to have anything to do with this triumph of peacemaking. Yes, Vance was apparently no longer allowed to go to Islamabad for peace talks with Iran.

Yep, Vance’s wings got clipped. Do you think people figured out how incredibly off-putting he is and thought things might just get worse if we sent him?

Things disintegrated for ol’ JD pretty quickly Tuesday. At first, the Washington Post reported that the U.S. delegation was delayed because it had to stick around for “additional policy meetings.”

Imagine pretending that there’s any policy or strategy at work here whatsoever, much less one that requires additional meetings. But within the hour, we learned that Vance’s trip was entirely off—ostensibly because Tehran hadn’t responded to any U.S. offers.

We also really had no idea what the status of the Iranian delegation actually was. The New York Times had reported that senior Iranian officials were already planning to travel to Islamabad to attend talks with Vance. But that was followed by The Associated Press reporting that Iran hadn’t decided whether it would attend at all.

Meanwhile, even as Trump was saying that it was “highly unlikely” that the ceasefire would be extended, he was apparently negotiating to extend the ceasefire. Or he extended it unilaterally, based on vibes. Either way, Vance was once again ghosted from the whole process.

It’s good that Trump didn’t wait until the very last minute here, given that there didn’t even seem to be an agreement about when, exactly, the ceasefire would have expired. Trump said that the deadline was Wednesday evening Eastern time, but a Pakistani official said that it would expire Wednesday morning at 4:50 local time, which is 7:50 PM on Tuesday Eastern Time.

Sure glad we worked through that minor misunderstanding!

Meanwhile, Vance is either cooling his heels, flushed with relief that he didn’t have to go. Or he’s getting over the adrenaline rush of pumping himself up, telling himself that once they turn him loose, it’s over for those suckers.

Oh, wait. Remember the last time we sent Vance to negotiate, he lasted a marathon 21 hours before throwing up his hands and going home?

To be fair to Vance, it isn’t like Trump really seems to have a negotiation strategy—it’s just threats and ever-shifting demands. Vance should feel lucky to be sent to his room on this one while Trump pulled a TACO yet again.

:Lucky break, JD.

Reprinted with permission from Daily Kos


Ranting On Truth Social, Trump Insists 'I'm Winning The War, By A LOT'

Ranting On Truth Social, Trump Insists 'I'm Winning The War, By A LOT'

President Donald Trump spent Monday afternoon contradicting his own claims about an Iran peace deal, declaring he is “winning” a war and faces no pressure — just one day after saying a deal would be signed by Monday night.

On Sunday, the president reportedly told Fox Business’ Maria Bartiromo that he expected a deal with Iran “will be signed” by Monday night. But on Monday, Trump lashed out at Democrats (“TRAITORS ALL“), and insisted that “If a Deal happens under ‘TRUMP,’ it will guarantee Peace, Security, and Safety, not only for Israel and the Middle East, but for Europe, America, and everywhere else.” No mention of a deal being signed imminently.

In fact, Trump appeared to suggest he was in no rush to sign a deal.

“I read the Fake News saying that I am under ‘pressure’ to make a Deal. THIS IS NOT TRUE! I am under no pressure whatsoever, although, it will all happen, relatively quickly!”

He also insisted that he is not going to let Democrats “rush the United States into making a Deal that is not as good as it could have been.”

Meanwhile, as CBS News reports, Iran “said Monday that it has no plans to attend peace talks in Pakistan with President Trump’s top three negotiators, including Vice President JD Vance, as Tehran balks at what it considers ‘unreasonable and unrealistic demands’ by the White House.”

In his posts, the president compared the length of his war in Iran with World War I, World War II, the Korean War, the Vietnam War, and the Iraq War, in an effort to suggest his war is being executed in a judicious manner and insisting that he is “winning.”

Trump claimed that his war is being “perfectly executed, on the scale of Venezuela, just a bigger, more complex operation.” And he claimed, “I am properly and judiciously using our Military to solve problems left to us by others of far less understanding or competence.”

“I’m winning a War, BY A LOT, things are going very well,” he insisted, stating that “our Military has been amazing,” while lashing out at “the Fake News, like The Failing New York Times, the absolutely horrendous and disgusting Wall Street Journal, or the now almost defunct, fortunately, Washington Post, you would actually think we are losing the War,” he said.

While claiming that the “enemy is confused, because they get these same Media ‘reports,'” Trump hailed what he claimed was successful “Regime Change.”

“The Anti-America Fake News Media is rooting for Iran to win, but it’s not going to happen, because I’m in charge! Just like these unpatriotic people used every ounce of their limited strength to fight me in the Election, they continue to do so with Iran. The result will be the same — It already is!”

Critics slammed the president’s comments.

“This is a war he started to: – distract from the Epstein files – make money from manipulating markets – boost profits for his oil donors – as an excuse to give his family lucrative military contracts,” wrote organizer and healthcare advocate Melanie D’Arrigo. “His tantrums always need context.”

Jonah Allon, deputy communications director for New York Governor Kathy Hochul, wrote, “amazing this whole counter-messaging effort is happening now.” He said, “there was never going to be a communications strategy that could have sold this hideously unpopular war, but one really is struck by the sloth and lack of coordination since trump announced the strikes in late february.”


Shop our Store

Headlines

Editor's Blog

Trending

World