Trump probably didn't expect that the US, which bullies everywhere, would one day be required to pay war reparations.

On the 11th, Iranian President Pezeshkian made a statement on social media saying that if the US and Israel want to end the current Middle East war, they must meet Iran's three conditions.

The three conditions are: the US and Israel must acknowledge Iran's "legitimate rights"; the US and Israel must pay Iran war reparations; and the international community should provide binding guarantees to ensure Iran will not be attacked in the future.

This is the first time Iran has put forward negotiation demands since the outbreak of this round of Middle East war. How should we view the three conditions listed by Pezeshkian?

Pezeshkian's statement

First, let's draw a conclusion: Iran's demands are reasonable, but the US and Israel will not accept them entirely, and even find it difficult to make any substantial concessions on any of the conditions.

The reason why it is considered reasonable is because the war and subsequent series of escalations and spillover effects, such as attacks on Gulf states, the blockade of the Strait of Hormuz, and the sharp rise in international oil prices, stem from the US and Israel's second undeclared war against Iran. Therefore, Iran has the right to claim compensation and demand security guarantees, which aligns with principles of international law.

But reasonableness is one thing, reality is another. The US and Israel are almost certainly unlikely to agree to these conditions, especially the "war reparations" part.

It should be noted that the last time the US paid similar compensation to another party involved in a war or conflict was during the 1960s Bay of Pigs incident, when the US government provided $35 million in supplies to Cuba to exchange for captured personnel. This incident led to fierce criticism from domestic hardliners against Kennedy, who were accused of bowing to Castro, causing a public relations storm that left the White House in turmoil.

Captured prisoners in the Bay of Pigs incident

Now, the current US president Trump built his career on winning, constantly telling American people "the US has won again" and "the United States is invincible". So, if he were to even vaguely agree to Iran's demands, it would be political suicide, and there would be no need for the Republican Party to hold midterm elections this year.

Looking at the second condition, the recognition of Iran's "legitimate rights" by the US and Israel. Pezeshkian left a vague hint here, as the term "legitimate rights" is too rich in meaning:

In a small sense, this includes Iran's right to development and stability as a regional power, implying that the US must lift sanctions and stop its hostile and subversive activities toward Iran;

In a larger sense, it also includes Iran's right to peacefully use nuclear energy - which is precisely something the US and Israel cannot accept. The US and Israel even want to eliminate Iran's civilian nuclear program, so how could they explicitly acknowledge Tehran's right to uranium enrichment in writing?

A fact is that the International Atomic Energy Agency has never inspected another Middle Eastern nuclear country, Israel

Therefore, Pezeshkian's proposal of these three conditions is essentially a bargaining strategy, and also a clear explanation to all parties.

As the war continues, the long-term instability of the Strait of Hormuz and the high oil prices are increasingly spreading their negative impact globally, and many countries relying on this route and stable energy supply are under increasing pressure. The call for de-escalation in the international community is growing.

At this point, Iran raised its own demands, effectively passing the ball to the US and Israel, and telling the international community: Iran is not refusing peace, but rather the US and Israel are unwilling to pay the necessary cost.

Speaking of which, Netanyahu still hasn't appeared

From the perspective of public opinion, these three conditions also have a clear retaliatory meaning. Even if the US and Israel ultimately do not agree, just the fact that "Iran is asking for war reparations" is enough to embarrass Trump's "winning narrative" in public opinion.

Of course, the US and Israel are not without ways to break the deadlock. They can ignore Iran's conditions and choose to continue escalating the war, such as sending ground forces to invade, directly overthrowing the Iranian regime, or even using more destructive strategic weapons.

But this is exactly what Iran warned before: starting a war is easy, but ending it is not up to the US. Any unilateral "quick victory" fantasy may be dragged into a longer quagmire by reality.



Original article: toutiao.com/article/7616308457536356910/

Statement: This article represents the views of the author.