The Firingest Ceasefire Ever
The U.S. hit several targets in Iran as negotiations for a peace deal continue.
The Trump administration keeps signaling that a deal to end the three-month-old war with Iran is nearing.
POLITICO (“Rubio says US-Iran peace deal could take ‘a few more days’“):
U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio said Tuesday that the United States and Iran may require “a few more days” to reach an agreement to end the war between the two countries, dampening hopes for a quick resolution to the military conflict that began three months ago.
“The president’s expressed his desire to make [a deal] — he’s either going to make a good deal or no deal,” Rubio told journalists as he concluded a four-day visit to India, during which he discussed the war’s impact on global energy prices with Prime Minister Narendra Modi. “But that may take a little while, I mean, a few more days.”
AP (“What we know and don’t know about the emerging deal to end the Iran war“):
The United States and Iran appear to be closing in on a deal to end the war and open the Strait of Hormuz. U.S. President Donald Trump said Monday that negotiations are “proceeding nicely,” while reiterating his warning that fighting would resume if no deal is reached.
It is not clear when or how the deal might be finalized and when its various parts will take effect. Details come from two regional officials and a U.S. official who spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss the sensitive negotiations.
An Iranian delegation led by parliament speaker Mohammad Bagher Qalibaf traveled to Qatar on Monday as part of talks, though it wasn’t immediately clear what would be discussed. Qalibaf led historic face-to-face talks with Vice President JD Vance in Pakistan last month.
Iran’s Foreign Ministry spokesman, Esmail Baghaei, said that while understandings have been reached on “a large portion of the issues,” there was still work to be done. “To say that this means an agreement is on the verge of being signed is not something anyone can claim,” he told reporters.
The sticking points throughout (whether Israel can continue its war against Hezbollah in Lebanon, whether Iran will continue supporting its proxies throughout the region, under what conditions the Strait of Hormuz reopens, and the fate of Iran’s nuclear program) continue to be the sticking points.
Meanwhile, both sides maintain that a ceasefire remains in place despite the fact that firing has not ceased.
NYT (“U.S. Carries Out Renewed Strikes in Southern Iran“):
American military forces conducted what U.S. Central Command said were “self-defense strikes” in southern Iran on Monday “to protect our troops from threats posed by Iranian forces.”
The targets included missile launch sites and Iranian boats trying to place mines, Capt. Tim Hawkins, a Central Command spokesman, said in a statement.
“U.S. Central Command continues to defend our forces while using restraint during the ongoing cease-fire,” said Captain Hawkins, who declined to say which ships came under fire, where they were located or precisely where the other U.S. strikes took place.
A senior U.S. military official said Iranian surface-to-air missiles threatened some of the dozens of American warplanes and nearly two dozen Navy warships — including two aircraft carriers and their escort vessels — that are in or around the Gulf of Oman and Arabian Sea enforcing a blockade against vessels trying to enter or leave Iranian ports. The official added that the U.S. strikes hit near Bandar Abbas, a major port and Iranian navy base.
American and Iranian forces have had other skirmishes since a cease-fire took effect about six weeks ago. But the strikes on Monday came as Iranian negotiators arrived in Qatar for talks on ending the war, and they threatened to upend a fragile potential agreement that President Trump has said could reopen the Strait of Hormuz and relieve the greatest energy disruption in modern times.
That Iranian missile batteries were reportedly zeroing in on U.S. Navy ships came as no surprise, despite repeated assertions from Mr. Trump, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and other military leaders that the 38-day American-Israeli military campaign had vastly degraded or destroyed much of Iran’s combat power.
U.S. intelligence agencies have told policymakers in confidential assessments from early this month that Iran has regained access to most of its missile sites, launchers and underground facilities. While the United States has sunk most of Iran’s conventional navy, Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps still retains hundreds of small speedboats that can be used to lay mines in the strait.
Most alarming to some senior officials is evidence that Iran has restored operational access to 30 of the 33 missile sites it maintains along the Strait of Hormuz, which could threaten American warships and oil tankers transiting the narrow waterway.
Which underscores a point I have been making since it began: the so-called ceasefire disproportionately benefits Iran. It has given them weeks to re-arm and regroup. Conversely, the readiness of American sailors and Marines aboard ship are considerably degraded through a combination of boredom, atrophy, and rustiness.
The initial US strikes, killing the Iranian leadership, happened while the US was still officially in the middle of negotiations with Iran. Is that.. normal? Acceptable? Just realpolitik? I’m curious why anyone would consider the US as a good faith negotiator going forward.
@Assad K:
Think of it as trumpian, trust building measures.
I expect that Iran will just keep drawing this out. It hurts us more than them or at least it’s a cost they are willing to bear. If there is an agreement reached in the next few weeks I predict that Iran will be allowed to maintain control of the strait. My guess is that in all of those phone calls Trump had with the Gulf countries he guaranteed the US would help finance pipelines and that the Iranian control of the strait would be short lived.
As an aside, I remember well the waiting period in Desert Storm. It was toxic for our guys. Kills morale and a lot of the guys went actively looking for ways to get into trouble.
Steve
@steve222:
Enormous amounts of food, consumer goods, industrial materials, and LNG also pass through the Strait and don’t fit in pipelines.
Bully’s always appear tough until someone stands up to them and reveals them to be weak and feckless.
Rubio continues to demand that the Strait return to the status quo prior to Trump’s idiocy.
And Trump is undergoing his third annual physical this year.
These clowns embarrass us all.
It is normal in negotiations to try to stay cordial and avoid embarrassing or insulting the interlocutor, as the path to better outcome.
These negotiations are unusual as Iran is actively attempting to embarrass and humiliate Donald J. Trump as much as they can. This is not the sort of interlocutor Trump is experienced at dealing with.
Trump’s desire/need for a non-embarrassing offramp is not something Iran wants him to have.
The warning to beware of Greeks bearing gifts will be updated to beware of Americans while negotiating. I was taught in grade school that attacks while negotiating was an example of degenerate treachery. I must imagine that Trump and the United States will be used as examples instead of the Empire of Japan. I sure that our opponents have incorporated this rule. What are we going to do when someone does it to us? Surely someone will sooner or later. The world’s sympathy will not be as effective as after 9/11 when Australia sent 17,000 soldiers to the Iraq war.
@charontwo: I may be misreading (or misunderstanding) the post, but are you sure you haven’t flipped the roles here? Trump’s bad faith and insults have permeated the talks since Day One, not to mention the multiple times he has green lit military strikes with negotiations actively underway. Agree 100% that open, honest and cordial discussions are far more likely to reach a consensus, but to suggest that the Iranians being mean to Trump has been the roadblock is willfully ignoring Trump’s childish behavior.
@Charley in Cleveland:
I am not ignoring or apologizing for Trump’s behavior, just pointing out he has no grasp of Iran’s goals or capabilities.
You might could follow this link I posted in the other thread, today’s discussion is a doozy.
“Black Man Spy“
@Charley in Cleveland:
Category error here, Trump does not do what are normally thought of as negotiations, he does dominance displays to bully people. And guess what – he finds himself in a situation where he does not “have the cards.”
We are in a transition phase. We are transitioning to drones. Drones took out the vaunted S-300 SAM system. Drones are running circles around US aircraft carriers.
We are on the wrong side of the innovators dilemma. With Trump and Hegseth, I think we are stuck there, too, as they both have inflexible mindsets and an obsession with “masculinity” as they define it – being the biggest.
Meanwhile, drones can be fought. Ukranians have shown that all it takes is an open-cockpit aircraft, a pilot, and a guy with a shotgun. Cheap. Effective.
We could probably use small-caliber mounts with some sort of combined sensor targeting to make a kill vehicle that can down several dozen drones in one pass. But we haven’t because we didn’t see the threat coming soon enough.
Maybe we will still need the ability to deliver big bombs somehow, but we already use the B-1s sparingly.
So, I would hate to see us cede what should be international waters to Iran, but that’s the de facto situation. I think it will probably take us a few years to stand up something that can counter this.
Well, we murdered a bunch of their top brass in an unprovoked attack to start things off.
After that the Iranians have been acting out their worst selves, just as the Israelis acted out their worse selves after the attack from Hamas. It isn’t good, but it is expected. Trump thought they couldn’t do anything about it. We know for sure that the brass told him otherwise and he waved them off.
So the onus for this is on Trump for sure, but that doesn’t mean Iran has been well-behaved.
There is a long list of people in history who think “bomb the shit out of them” is a winning strategy. We’ve seen over and over that while it can be part of a winning strategy, it is not winning in and of itself. And yet we keep putting people in charge who have to pee on that electric fence for themselves.
The US and Israel have the FIRE! part of ceasefire down.
@Jay L. Gischer: Systems already exist and drones aren’t “running circles around carriers” because they’d be shot down before they got anywhere near doing so. The USA has been fully aware of the capabilities of drone warfare long before Ukraine started.
M-LIDS
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mobile-Low,_Slow,_Small_Unmanned_Aircraft_Integrated_Defeat_System
As you can see they are often deployed with C-RAM systems.
MADIS systems have been in production since last year.
The directed energy weapon equiped Stryker prototype seems to be going well.
https://www.leonardodrs.com/news/press-releases/leonardo-drs-and-bluehalo-successfully-demonstrate-new-counter-uas-directed-energy-stryker-shooting-down-drones-in-live-fire-engagement/
The BLADE system has been successfully tested after being in development since 2016.
https://www.army.mil/article/288237/blade_cuts_down_drones_at_project_flytrap_4_0
Look into the loyal wingman (CCA) system if you want to see how even the air force is integrating drones into aerial battles. THis is the result of decades of discussion on replacing manned craft with unmanned craft. The F-35 itself is designed to coordinate whole swarms of drones in attack and defense actions.
The USA has been producing advanced drones for decades now. To try to claim we’re being blind sided by drones is just outright silly.
The USA isn’t going to send bleeding edge systems with ECM and anti-drone capabilities to Ukraine. They have been getting old clapped out systems that are generations behind.
@Jay L. Gischer: I got so caught up in the drone side of your post that I forgot to talk about the S-300 system.
The S-300 system is only vaunted by Russia and those connected. You can’t take anything the Russian’s claim as being truthful. Every single weapon system they have talked up has been shown to be a farce in combat. That’s why you don’t see T90s, BMP-Ts or Su-57s doing anything of real value in Ukraine. The S-300 system itself was designed in the 1970s and the 9S19 Imbir radar (vintage 1980s) part of the system has had issues tracking low flying stuff for some time now. It struggles to detect tomahawk cruise missiles so it’s going to be basically useless against modern drones. The 9S19 radar also has several critical issues that have never been fixed including a limited scan rate. The brains of the system really can’t handle modern electronic warfare either. So Ukraine is exploiting those weaknesses when they take out S-300 systems.
China and Ukraine have both heavily modified their S-300 systems.