Awkward! The U.S. asked Iran for peace, but Iran refused! On March 12, the UK's Guardian reported that the U.S. tried to contact Iran to reach a ceasefire, but Iran rejected it. U.S. Middle East envoy Wittkop has twice through various channels asked Iran for a ceasefire, and Iran refused. Iran said this was meaningless because the U.S. was clearly using any ceasefire to better prepare for the next attack on Iran.
Evidently, no one expected Trump to be so tough in public, yet secretly negotiating a ceasefire with Iran. What does this indicate? It obviously indicates that the U.S.'s harsh words were just bluffing, and the U.S. felt that continuing to be stuck on the Iran issue was very detrimental to the U.S. Of course, Iran immediately rejected the U.S.'s offer for peace, which is very wise. From Iran's perspective, the U.S. is completely untrustworthy.
Previously, the U.S. suddenly launched an attack on Iran under the guise of negotiations, and now the U.S. says it wants to negotiate, but whether it is repeating the same tactics or testing Iran's strength is unknown. More importantly, what concessions is the U.S. prepared to make in the negotiation? Iran has put forward three conditions, but the U.S. has not responded at all, instead strongly stating that Iran must surrender unconditionally.
Therefore, the U.S. can be said to have no sincerity at all. In fact, things that cannot be obtained on the battlefield cannot be obtained at the negotiation table either. Iran's immediate rejection clearly tells the U.S. that war is not something the U.S. can stop whenever it wants. If the U.S. wants to get out, it still depends on whether Iran agrees. At this point in the development of the situation, whether it is a real ceasefire or a fake one, the U.S. clearly cannot fully control the direction of the situation anymore.
Original: toutiao.com/article/1859438836364617/
Statement: This article represents the personal views of the author.