Despite Donald Trump claiming over the weekend that a peace deal with Iran had been “largely negotiated”, the US carried out fresh strikes overnight on Iranian missile sites and two boats that it claimed were attempting to lay mines.
US Central Command said that the operation was “self defence” in order to protect US troops from threats posed by Iranian forces.
Central Command spokesperson Captain Tim Hawkins said the US strikes targeted an area near Bandar Abbas, a southern port city that is home to an Iranian naval base, according to the New York Times.
Hawkins stated that the US military “continues to defend our forces while using restraint during the ongoing ceasefire”.
However, the move could jeopardise ongoing talks between the two countries, as they look towards a more permanent peace agreement.
The response to the US strikes
Trump is yet to make a direct statement on the overnight strikes. However, just hours before, he posted a statement on Truth Social about the future of Iran’s nuclear weapons programme, saying that Iran’s “Nuclear Dust” will either be turned over to the US or destroyed, “preferably, in conjunction and coordination with the Islamic Republic of Iran”.
Trump also posted that talks between the two countries were progressing. “Negotiations with the Islamic Republic of Iran are proceeding nicely! It will only be a Great Deal for all or, no Deal at all — Back to the Battlefront and shooting, but bigger and stronger than ever before — And nobody wants that!”
Trump has given the impression that negotiations are progressing (Photo: Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images)While peace talks are dragging on, the vital Strait of Hormuz – through which around 20 per cent of the world’s oil passed before the conflict – remain effectively shut.
US Secretary of State Marco Rubio said after the strikes that: “The straits have to be open. They’re going to be open one way or the other, so they need to be open. What’s happening there is unlawful, it’s illegal, it’s unsustainable for the world, it’s unacceptable.”
In the immediate aftermath of the US strikes, Iran responded, with the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) claiming that it has shot down a US MQ-9 Reaper drone. It also claimed that Iranian forces have “fired upon” an RQ-4 drone and “drove off” a US F-35 fighter jet.
Ebrahim Azizi, the head of the national security committee of Iran’s parliament, warned Tuesday that attacks on his country’s armed forces would be met with “a decisive, crushing, and regrettable response”.
“If the enemies of the Iranian nation want to make a mistake and take any action,” Azizi told Iranian state broadcaster IRIB, the country’s military “will be able to prevent them from doing anything”.
Andrew Moran, a professor of politics and international relations at the London Metropolitan University, told The i Paper that Trump “is trying to push the Iranians to make a decision on the deal quicker. He’s showing that the attacks could resume on a larger scale”.
How will the strikes impact negotiations?
The strikes come at a delicate moment in the ongoing peace talks, after Trump claimed over the weekend that a deal was imminent.Moran said that the strikes “could delay negotiations”. However, he added that Iran will most likely sit tight and keep on negotiating, “because they have a clear list of things that they want. At the moment, they’re pretty much in the driving seat, so they may well just take the hit and not allow the situation to escalate.”
Professor Andrew Moran thinks that Iran won’t escalate the situation (Photo: Atta Kenare/AFP/Getty Images)The two sides have agreed to a 60-day ceasefire extension, the reopening of the Strait of Hormuz, the lifting of restrictions to allow Iran to freely sell oil and the removal of mines from the strait, according to Axios.Iran also reportedly agreed to not impose tolls on ships passing through the waterway. However, the issue of what will happen to Tehran’s stockpile of highly enriched uranium could prove to be a major sticking point.Following the strikes, Rubio said that an agreement was still possible, pointing to talks on Tuesday between Iran’s top negotiator and foreign minister and Qatar’s prime minister.“We’ll see if we can make progress,” he said. “I think it’s a lot of talking back and forth going on about specific language in the initial document, so it’ll take a few days.”Rubio added that Trump had “expressed his desire to make it… He’s either going to make a good deal or no deal”.The ceasefire has been breached in the past without a return to all-out war. On 8 May, Iran launched missiles, drones and small boats against three US warships, after it claimed that the US had launched “aerial strikes” on its coastline. The US called the Iranian attack “unprovoked”, but it did not retaliate.
Domestic pushback on Trump’s deal
While a possible peace deal between the two countries has been welcomed by much of the world, high-profile Republicans and Trump supporters in the US have made their distaste clear. Texas Senator Ted Cruz said he was “deeply concerned” about a deal, adding that: “If the result of [the war] is to be an Iranian regime—still run by Islamists who chant ‘death to America’—now receiving billions of dollars, being able to enrich uranium & develop nuclear weapons, and having effective control over the Strait of Hormuz, then that outcome would be a disastrous mistake.” Senator Lindsey Graham warned that the deal could mean Iran is perceived as a “dominant force” in the region. “This combination of Iran being perceived as having the ability to terrorize the Strait in perpetuity and the ability [to] inflict massive damage to Gulf oil infrastructure is a major shift of the balance of power in the region and over time will be a nightmare for Israel,” he said.According to Moran, the blowback from figures in Trump’s party could be part of the reason for Monday’s strikes. “The criticism over the weekend that the deal shows America as being very weak and that the Iranians could come out quite well from the process will no doubt have caught Trump’s eye,” he said. “It could be that these strikes are attempts by the President to try and divert the conversation a little bit, because he’s under attack from his own party.”Whatever the reason, the idea of an imminent peace deal is looking a little more shaky today.
Hence then, the article about what the latest us strikes on iran mean for a peace deal was published today ( ) and is available on inews ( Middle East ) The editorial team at PressBee has edited and verified it, and it may have been modified, fully republished, or quoted. You can read and follow the updates of this news or article from its original source.
Read More Details
Finally We wish PressBee provided you with enough information of ( What the latest US strikes on Iran mean for a peace deal )
Also on site :