Olivia
Online
Chairman Rabbit
@ChairmanRabbit
living in China | cosmopolitan patriot | progressive traditionalist | secular spiritualist | Harvard | investment banker | geopolitics analyst | China voice
Beijing
Joined October 2016
422 Following
12.9K Followers
2.3K Posts
Pinned Tweet
Dear readers: this is my latest platform for publishing Chinese articles. Readers who follow China-related news, please follow me. "tuzhuxi新平台" , at wechat.
This article is extraordinary, and greatly deepens our understanding of present-day and future Iran. A must read.
“The war’s initial aim—to deliver a death blow to the Islamic Republic—has proved unattainable,” write Narges Bajoghli and @vali_nasr. “Rather than breaking Iran, the crucible of war has transformed it in unanticipated ways.”
https://t.co/ckX1voRWvL
Totally wrong. China is a socialist country with this as its fundamental political system. Ultimately, the excess value generated by tech enterprises and tech capital will be redistributed by the government to all people in an equitable manner. Institutionally, China has laid solid groundwork for the future AI-driven economy. Widening wealth disparity stemming from technological advancement is largely an American predicament inherent to the United States’ unique ideology and politics.
In the end, we will have tech-socialism in China in one hand, and tech-feudalism in the US on the other hand. One is utopia , the other dystopia. One a commonwealth futuristic society, the other a world of cyber punk.
That could make a starkly unequal country even more so https://t.co/mqfgiTo8Eq
how many times The Economist has posted this article on X? 20 times ? 30 times ? why ?
Xi Jinping will have to choose carefully when it comes to handling of his right-hand man’s future. Aides and advisers can easily be replaced. Trust cannot. Want our take on it? Read on by registering for free https://t.co/vDqWSfmLvv
Who to follow
Mao
@Maoviews
"It doesn’t matter whether it is a white cat or a black cat, as long as it catches mice, it is a good cat." 中国通. The Better China Hand.
Taisu Zhang
@ZhangTaisu
Professor @YaleLawSch and @yale_history, comparative historian, legal theorist, occasional commentator on China-related stuff.
Neil Thomas 牛犇
@neilthomas123
Fellow @AsiaSociety Center for China Analysis. Ex @EurasiaGroup @Harvard. Words @ForeignAffairs @ForeignPolicy @NYTimes @TIME @WashingtonPost etc. Views my own.
Naturally. With Monday just around the corner, he’s bound to release good news. He’s pulled this same trick for how many times alteady ?
BREAKING: US president Donald Trump has released a new statement on the situation with Iran, claiming Tehran “really wants to make a deal” and that whatever deal is reached will “be a good one for the U.S.A. and those that are with us”.
🔴LIVE updates: https://t.co/vMLSm97yTp
Shanghai
Sun Tzu said: "If you know yourself and your enemy, you will never be defeated in a hundred battles." If you know nothing about your rivals, you are bound to lose every competition. For China, the West’s sheer ignorance of China creates a massive information asymmetry that works overwhelmingly in China’s favor. And the level of information asymmetry is growing by the day.
This is genuinely incredible and says SO SO MUCH about the perception of China in the West.
This is the #1 news show in France, and the host - David Pujadas - asks the pundits around the table (a sample of the top media figures in France) if they can name 3 living Chinese people.
That's it: they just need to say the names of 3 living Chinese people, anyone. This should be extremely easy.
Yet not of a single one of them can name a single Chinese beyond Xi Jinping. They do not know a single living Chinese person beyond the president.
That's the level of ignorance of China we're dealing with in the West today, in 2026.
This is the source for the video: https://t.co/9UnWyu63g8 Aired live yesterday 28th of May 2026.
Shanghai
Still , Mr Bessent comes across as the most innocuous member of Trump’s Cabinet.
.@SecScottBessent destroys the @washingtonpost in the White House briefing room:
"Who here is from the Post? Yeah, terribly written, terribly edited."
"Basically what it says is that Treasury is following the law?"
Everything he lost in the Iran war, he will recoup elsewhere.
Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu says he has directed the military to take over 70% of Gaza, adding that it's "tightening" its grip on Hamas https://t.co/E5YdrAgVEv
Some are genuine critics, but a large portion of these so-called commentators are neoconservatives and the Israel lobby. They hope to pressure Trump in this way into abandoning peace and restarting the war.
Donald Trump is frustrated with his inability to get Iran to capitulate—and angry at commentators who say the stalemate makes him look weak, @JonLemire and @nancyayoussef report: https://t.co/cUxvAKhlPC
JD Vance is the biggest casualty of the Iran war. Buried alongside him is the MAGA coalition.
Jensen Huang feels his ever at home in China，because, guess what - he's (ethnically) Chinese. Digest this information.
Are you fucking kidding me
Unfortunately, average American voters today won’t buy any of this. For one thing, they distrust all professors and intellectual elites, as well as and in particular elite univerisities like Harvard. For another, they cannot bring themselves to trust an interview framed in such a setting: an ethnic Chinese conducting the interview, with another Chinese intellectual being jointly interviewed. And they all know each other. The audience see all of this as a setup, and what they promote as a narrative,a propaganda myth, crafted by intellectual elites and global capital.
Here I'm not talking about whether these professors have to say are right or wrong, at all. What I want to address instead is how prevalent this line of thinking is in today’s American political landscape.
And these academics, too, live confined within their own bubbles and echo chambers.
This is absolutely fascinating: Jason Furman, one of the foremost economists in the U.S. and former chair of the Council of Economic Advisers, explains why the so-called "China shock" is a myth.
According to him, "85 to 95% of Americans benefited" from trade with China, and "China has been part of helping [the US economy] work, not hurting it work."
In other words, the narrative that China "stole" American jobs and wages is the exact opposite of reality.
Furman's logic is pretty ironclad:
1) He points out, which is factual, that "the slowdown of wage growth and the rise of inequality began in the 1970s, when there basically was no trade with China." It then accelerated in the 1980s-90s when China trade was small, and **slowed down** after 2000. And "since about 2013," when trade with China was at its highest, "we've had pretty fast real wage growth," with "the fastest real wage growth for moderate income households."
In other words, the timing doesn't fit: if China was the cause, the problem should have gotten worse as trade with China increased. Instead, it got better.
2) A common narrative one hears about China is "who cares about affordable goods, we need well-paying jobs." But Furman points out it's actually one and the same thing: "the way we measure jobs is how much your wages can buy. If you improve purchasing power, you are making every single job in the economy better."
In very concrete terms, if salaries stay flat but Chinese imports make goods 10% cheaper, your purchasing power just went up 10%, as if you got a 10% wage hike. This makes every single job in the economy better.
In effect "jobs vs. cheap goods" is a false dichotomy: cheap goods ARE better jobs.
3) Furman also points out, rightly, that the majority of what U.S. imports from China isn't consumer goods: "more than half of what we import is actually inputs into the manufacturing process itself."
In other words, Chinese imports make U.S. manufacturing MORE competitive as it decreases their input costs. If you were to cut all Chinese imports, you'd cripple U.S. manufacturing as it would no longer be able to compete on price with anyone. And, as per point 2 above, you'd also destroy Americans' purchasing power, making every single U.S. worker worse off.
4) Last but not least, Furman says that the "China shock" literature is fundamentally flawed, as it "doesn't answer the most important question, which is what the net effect was." It "doesn't consider other causes for the job losses, doesn't look at all the places that gained jobs and wages, and doesn't integrate the consumer side."
All in all, he believes that if one were to actually calculate the net effect of trade with China on the U.S. economy, it'd show that "85 to 95% of Americans benefited." And even for the 5-15% who lost out, Furman says these people were failed by "our labor policies, our social safety net" - not by China.
What Furman is saying is more relevant than ever because, both in the U.S. and in Europe, this notion that China is somehow "stealing" Western jobs and prosperity has become the unquestioned premise of so many of today's policies.
Nobody even debates it anymore, it's almost universally assumed correct.
In my own country France, Macron keeps repeating it all the time, leading the charge in Europe to slap tariffs on Chinese imports, warning that China is "killing its own customers" and that it's a question of life or death for European industry (https://t.co/Auq9rvyEwk). He literally called last week for the EU to build its own version of America's Section 301 - the same protectionist tool Trump uses (https://t.co/yHJ6M43suw).
BUT, if Furman is right, and the data strongly suggests he is, France and Europe are about to inflict economic self-harm in the name of a problem that doesn't exist.
Much more affordable cars, for instance, would literally give every single European a big wage hike. It's Furman's argument on "85 to 95% benefiting" vs 5% to 15% losing out: the vast majority of Europeans would see their money go further, while a small number of jobs in legacy automakers would be disrupted. Instead of helping those workers transition, Europe wants to prevent making everyone better off.
Anyhow, please do watch the whole podcast, which has many other fascinating insights because Furman also debates with Justin Yifu Lin, the former Chief Economist of the World Bank and State Council Counsellor of China.
They're both interviewed by my friend @Hansong_Li - also a professor and an immensely smart man - in his excellent new podcast "worldviews" (imho one of the best new podcasts our there). The video is here: https://t.co/M7sVgk9v3a
Hong Kong is PART OF China and functions as China's own offshore financial center. Its purpose is to give foreign / global more options and flexibilities in investing in China , where capital control is still in place for broader reasons.
This is quite funny. There were these two stories over the past 24 hours:
1) "China is seeing massive capital outflows"
2) "Hong Kong overtakes Switzerland as hub for global offshore wealth"
But it's actually one and the same story: China is seeing massive capital outflows BUT this capital largely lands in bank and brokerage accounts in... China, in Hong Kong.
It's actually the whole point of Hong Kong: it is China's own offshore center with a separate legal system, free capital flows, low taxes, and convertible currency.
So even when capital "leaves" China, most of it lands in China 🤷♂️
Trump’s Concession, Israel’s Sabotage, and a Pipe Dream: The Middle East’s Fragile Moment
Chairman Rabbit | tuzhuxi | 兔主席
Hopes for a ceasefire between the United States and Iran are rising, but the path to a deal is fraught with peril, caught between American political needs, Iranian stubbornness, and Israeli intransigence. The latest developments reveal a precarious dance on the brink of peace.
1. The Core Concession: Trump on "Nuclear Dust"
The most significant shift is Donald Trump’s public concession on Iran’s stockpile of highly enriched uranium (HEU). On Truth Social, he stated the material could be "destroyed in place" under international supervision, abandoning the long-standing U.S. demand for its removal. This largely aligns with Iran’s pre-war position and effectively resolves the most contentious issue. The move signals a clear American desire to exit the conflict, even at the cost of a symbolic victory for Tehran.
2. The Managed Conflict: Skirmishes in the Strait
Despite ceasefire talks, limited clashes continue in the Strait of Hormuz. U.S. strikes target Iranian vessels laying mines, and Iran retaliates with missile fire. Both sides, however, carefully frame their actions as "defensive" and avoid major escalation. This calibrated violence underscores Iran’s strategy to cement physical control over the vital waterway during the truce, while a wary U.S. demonstrates resolve without derailing diplomacy. The unspoken reality: America has tacitly accepted it cannot reclaim the Strait by force.
3. The Spoiler: Israel Escalates Against Hezbollah
As U.S.-Iran talks progress, Israel has intensified strikes against Lebanon’s Hezbollah, an Iranian proxy. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu justifies this as self-defence, testing whether a future U.S.-Iran deal would tolerate continued Israeli attacks on Iran’s allies. The campaign serves a dual purpose: applying military pressure and potentially sabotaging a broader regional truce that Iran demands. Washington, having conceded on the nuclear issue, appears to tolerate these actions, prioritizing its exit from the direct conflict with Iran.
4. The Political Fantasy: Reviving the Abraham Accords
In a bid for a political win, Trump has demanded that key Islamic nations - including Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Turkey and Pakistan- simultaneously sign the Abraham Accords with Israel as a condition for joining the impending Iran deal. He has even suggested Iran itself could eventually join. This is widely seen as an unrealistic gambit to offset the perception of a retreat from Iran. Key target countries have already rejected the linkage, and the demand ignores the profound anti-Israel sentiment in the region following the Gaza war. For Israel, the ploy is useful: if Arab states refuse, it gains a pretext to resist the U.S.-Iran détente.
The Stakes
The emerging framework suggests America is preparing to end its war in exchange for Iran relinquishing its most immediate nuclear leverage and reopening the Strait. Yet, the deal remains vulnerable. Trump’s need for a politically palatable victory clashes with Iran’s entrenched negotiating posture. Meanwhile, Israel’s independent military campaign and the non-starter of the expanded Abraham Accords threaten to unravel the fragile process. The coming days will test whether a face-saving exit can be forged, or if the region will spiral back into wider conflict.
This is merely an excuse for MBS to pass the buck. He used this line in communications with Trump, claiming he lacked final say and shifting responsibility to the King. In reality, no Saudi King could possibly agree to normalizing ties with Israel amid fierce public opposition to such a move. Even if MBS himself were King, he would never consent to it. Therefore, media outlets should not take MBS’s remarks at face value.
Saudi Crown Prince identifies King Salman as sole obstacle to immediate Saudi normalization with Israel
——
Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman privately told evangelical leader and Trump ally Mike Evans that he is ready to recognize Israel immediately, but considers his father, King Salman, to be the primary obstacle. In a report published by The Jerusalem Post, Evans stated that during a two-hour meeting with the crown prince, which was also attended by the Saudi foreign minister and the crown prince's brother, the latter expressed a similar willingness to formalize ties with Israel.
Evans claimed the crown prince was sharply critical of Palestinians, alleging they wasted financial aid and should copy Israel rather than attack it, while also rejecting the concept of dividing Jerusalem into two capitals. The remarks surface as US President Donald Trump actively pushes to tie a potential deal with Iran to a major expansion of the Abraham Accords.
According to The Jerusalem Post, Trump is leveraging his diplomatic influence to press several Arab and Muslim-majority nations, including Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Pakistan, Egypt, Jordan, and Turkey, into normalizing relations with Israel following a possible agreement to end the war with Iran. While Riyadh has historically maintained a public stance linking Israeli recognition to progress on Palestinian statehood, Evans argued that the current regional landscape has shifted and that Trump possesses the negotiation leverage to secure Saudi compliance.
Beyond regional normalization, Evans also detailed efforts by his organization, Friends of Zion, to counter rising non-interventionist and anti-Israel narratives within the US conservative movement. Speaking to The Jerusalem Post, Evans noted that his group mobilized 1,000 pastors for a social media campaign targeting media figure Tucker Carlson, whom Evans claimed has since been sidelined by Trump.
This is a stupid trick Trump came up with to persuade and pressure Israel into accepting the Iran deal. He’s forcing Muslim countries that are hostile to Israel to sign this foolish agreement. No one wants such a deal - not even Israel itself.
🚨 Trump demands Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Turkey, Egypt, Jordan, Pakistan sign Abraham Accords as condition of Iran deal
President Trump posted on Truth Social Monday demanding that all countries involved in Iran negotiations simultaneously sign the Abraham Accords, describing it as a prerequisite for any deal and warning those who refuse would be excluded from the agreement.
“It should be mandatory that all of these Countries, at a minimum, simultaneously, sign onto the Abraham Accords,” Trump wrote, naming Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Pakistan, Turkey, Egypt, Jordan, and Bahrain as targets. The UAE and Bahrain are already members.
🔸Trump warned: “If they don’t, they should not be part of this Deal in that it shows bad intention.”
🔸He said it “should start with the immediate signing by Saudi Arabia and Qatar, and everybody else should follow suit.”
🔸He also dangled Iran’s own potential membership, writing: “If Iran signs its Agreement with me… it would be an Honor to have them also be part of this unparalleled World Coalition.”
🔹The Abraham Accords, brokered during Trump’s first term, normalized relations between Israel and the UAE, Bahrain, Morocco, and Kazakhstan. Trump’s demand would require the mediating countries to recognize Israel and normalize relations as a condition of ending the Iran war — a significant ask given that Saudi Arabia has publicly conditioned any normalization on a credible and irreversible path to Palestinian statehood, a position shared in various forms by Turkey, Egypt, and others on the list.
🔹The demand comes as the U.S. has allowed Israel to continue the daily killing of Palestinians in Gaza for more than seven months since the October 2025 Trump-brokered ceasefire, with over 900 Palestinians killed since the agreement was approved by Israel. The U.S. and Israel are also deliberately blocking minimum levels of food, medicine, shelter, fuel, and reconstruction aid.
🔹President Trump has also removed sanctions on the most violent Israeli settlers in the occupied West Bank, where rampant state-backed settler violence to uproot Palestinian families has gone unchecked since the start of his second term.
🔹Trump closed his social media post with a warning: “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.”
Trump’s ego, Persian intransigence, Israeli spoilers: Three obstacles to a U.S.-Iran deal
Chairman Rabbit 兔主席
A vicious cycle is jeopardising the fragile peace process
Hopes for a ceasefire are rising, but a perilous triangle of obstacles—Donald Trump’s vanity, Iran’s stubbornness and Israel’s sabotage—threatens to derail the deal.
Trump’s ego, Persian intransigence, Israeli spoilers: Three obstacles to a U.S.-Iran deal
A vicious cycle is jeopardising the fragile peace process
Hopes for a ceasefire are rising, but a perilous triangle of obstacles—Donald Trump’s vanity, Iran’s stubbornness and Israel’s sabotage—threatens to derail the deal.
A deal within reach?
Ceasefire talks have entered the final stretch. Donald Trump claimed on Truth Social that an agreement has been “largely negotiated” with regional leaders. Secretary of State Marco Rubio echoed that a deal is imminent. American officials say 95% of terms are settled, with only nuclear and Strait issues outstanding. Tehran, meanwhile, has signalled its “two-phase” framework: first, end the war, reopen the Strait of Hormuz (initially toll‑free) and lift sanctions; then, address the nuclear file. Both sides now sound optimistic.
Yet mutual accusations persist. Under domestic pressure, Mr Trump tweeted that the blockade remains and talks should not be rushed. Iran retorted that America has “backtracked” on key points. The final outcome remains uncertain.
Trump’s ego
Mr Trump’s political brand rests on being a master dealmaker who always wins. Surrender is not in his lexicon. After months of threatening military escalation, he has achieved little on the battlefield. The Strait remains under Iranian control; America’s counter‑blockade has fuelled a global energy crisis and allied discontent. His fall‑back is a face‑saving “statement of intent”: declare the war over, reopen the Strait, and defer the nuclear issue for 30–60 days. The aim is to repackage strategic retreat as victory.
He hopes a reopened Strait, falling oil prices and a rising stockmarket will divert attention from America’s setbacks. He wants to claim credit for “opening” the waterway (omitting Iran’s de‑facto control) and to tout Iranian pledges on halting high‑enriched uranium and forswearing nuclear weapons—all to boast of a deal “far better than Obama’s JCPOA”. Disputes over uranium‑enrichment rights and sunset clauses would be fudged.
American officials have privately urged Iran to ignore Mr Trump’s bombastic posts—they are “for domestic consumption”. But Tehran asks: why should we endure insults while you boast? Every slight from Mr Trump poisons the talks.
At home, critics from left and right alike lambast the emerging framework as an American surrender. Republican hawks like Lindsey Graham and Ted Cruz call it a strategic defeat. Israel’s lobby, sensing an opening, amplifies the “capitulation” narrative to pressure Mr Trump. The president, thin‑skinned and proud, is sensitive to such attacks. In two weekend tweets, he insisted any deal would be “the exact opposite” of Obama’s and that he was in “no rush”. His message was clear: he needs a win, and it must look like one.
Persian intransigence
What frustrates Mr Trump is Iran’s refusal to play along. In Tehran’s view, America started this war; Iran endured it and now holds the Strait. Why should the victor offer more concessions? As a Russian diplomat once put it: “Iran never wins a war, but never loses a negotiation.”
Iran’s negotiating style is legendary: principled, detail‑obsessed and relentlessly patient. Its team arrives with stacks of documents and a prepared framework. This stems from a deep‑seated strategic culture. Iran is a nation of 90m people, with an unbroken civilisation stretching back millennia. Its nationalism is built on sovereignty, dignity and resistance to foreign coercion—especially America’s. Anti‑Americanism is core to the regime’s legitimacy.
Shia ideology, with its narratives of martyrdom and resistance, further hardens Tehran’s resolve. Even under bombardment, the state frames endurance as a sacred duty. Control of the Strait is seen as a vital national interest; any dilution is unacceptable. Hence Iran’s “two‑phase” demand: first, end hostilities and lift the blockade; only then discuss the nuclear issue. On that, it will pledge no bomb and dilute some stockpiles, but it will never surrender its right to enrich uranium—a symbol of sovereignty.
Mr Trump knows this. In 2020 he tweeted: “Iran never won a war, but never lost a negotiation!” Today, with the Strait in hand, Iran is tougher still. Whether it can show tactical flexibility—without compromising core principles—will test its strategic wisdom.
Israel’s spoilers
Israel views Iran as an existential threat. Its pre‑emptive strikes, assassinations and bombings have only made that threat more acute. Having failed to bomb Iran “back to the stone age”, Israel now faces a stronger rival: an energy‑rich regional power controlling the world’s most important oil chokepoint.
Worse, since the Gaza war of October 2023, Israel has depleted its political capital in America. Pro‑Palestinian sentiment now runs high among young Americans. For Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu, Mr Trump was a once‑in‑a‑generation opportunity—a president willing to join Israel’s war on Iran. That chance is slipping away.
Mr Netanyahu’s political survival hinges on confronting Iran. His right‑wing coalition demands Iran’s nuclear capability be “eradicated” and regime change pursued. Any peace deal is seen in Israel as a historic failure. With elections due, and corruption charges looming, Mr Netanyahu is mobilising every lever—lobbying Congress, whispering to the White House, stirring media—to sabotage the talks. He is the wildcard that could upend the delicate negotiations.
A vicious circle
These three obstacles feed on one another. Mr Trump’s loose tongue offends Iran, undermining trust. Iran’s rigidity denies him a victory narrative, making him vulnerable to Israeli pressure. Israel’s meddling deepens Iranian distrust, prompting more rigidity—which in turn makes Mr Trump look weaker.
It is a toxic feedback loop that could yet upend the fragile peace process. Whether a lasting truce emerges depends on whether these forces can be broken. The geopolitics of the Middle East have rarely been more brittle.
The report reflects reality, and aligns with China’s policy priorities. To generate sufficient employment for its vast population, a full manufacturing ecosystem is essential.
Historical evidence suggests that manufacturing powerhouses do not necessarily offshore low value-added industries. Take Germany, the industrial heart of Europe, which adheres to a whole-industrial-chain philosophy spanning from low- to high-end sectors, and from consumer goods to industrial products. Stationery, office supplies, toys, hardware and tools are still produced by German small and medium-sized enterprises, which compete on quality rather than cost. Even today, Staedtler continues to manufacture pencils, erasers and other small items.
What is more important is the fact that China os advancing automation within its existing industrial base. Eventually, labour will be replaced by robots, not by offshoring; and even if production capacity does move abroad, it will largely consist of automated production lines.
In the age of AI and automation, every nation must forge a new socio‑economic path.
Despite the country’s rising wages and sophistication, it “still commands a historically unusual share” of low-end manufacturing, according to a new paper https://t.co/qD1uwuuQ47
The Path to a Truce in Middle East
Washington edges towards Tehran’s terms for ending the conflict
Chairman Rabbit | 兔主席 | tuzhuxi
Signals from both Washington and Tehran suggest a rare convergence towards a ceasefire. All indications point to America moving closer to accepting Iranian conditions for ending the war: a resumption of shipping through the Strait of Hormuz under Iranian management, albeit initially toll-free, and the temporary shelving of the nuclear dispute. For the Trump administration, critics at home decry this framework as a form of surrender and America’s most significant strategic defeat since the second world war.
A Two-Phase Proposal from Tehran
On May 23rd, Drop Site News reported exclusively, citing a senior Iranian official, that Tehran had submitted a new truce proposal through mediators, adhering to its step-by-step framework.
Phase One demands: a formal declaration ending the war; the lifting of the American maritime blockade; the unfreezing of a portion of Iran’s assets prior to broader nuclear talks; an international mechanism involving the US and other war participants to compensate Iran for losses; and a halt to Israeli strikes in Lebanon. In return, Iran would temporarily reopen the Strait of Hormuz, waiving transit fees initially, pending the finalisation of a "new governance regime" for the strategic waterway. An Iranian official stated this was in response to the conflict’s "destructive impact on global energy and food markets" and appeals from regional and international partners.
Phase Two would address the nuclear issue. Tehran proposes: a voluntary 10-year suspension of uranium enrichment above 3.67%; the dilution of stockpiles enriched beyond 20% under external supervision; a pledge not to develop nuclear weapons; explicit recognition of its right to enrich uranium; and a full lifting of sanctions upon a final deal.
Control, Not Freedom, in the Strait
The proposal underscores that any reopening will occur under Iran’s exclusive control, involving Iranian-administered applications, designated routes, and future fees. Its current waiver of charges serves multiple purposes: responding to international pressure, providing Washington (Trump) with ambiguous wording to claim victory, and implicitly securing American acceptance of Iranian management. The eventual tolling mechanism can be calibrated at leisure.
Nuclear Stance: Familiar Ground with New Leverage
Iran’s nuclear terms largely mirror its pre-war position and the 2015 deal (JCPOA), which it now feels empowered to insist upon. The core divergence with Washington lies in sequencing: Iran insists on a ceasefire and sanctions relief beforenuclear negotiations, while America has pushed for a comprehensive, nuclear-first approach. Key disputes persist over uranium enrichment rights, levels, and sunset clauses. However, the most politically salient issues for Trump - the elimination of high-enriched uranium stockpiles and a no-nukes pledge - are areas of potential overlap, allowing him a face-saving narrative.
Trump’s Announcement and Iranian Warnings
On the evening of May 23rd, Trump took to Truth Social, announcing that an agreement had been "largely negotiated" with Iran and regional leaders, and that the Strait of Hormuz "will be opened." He notably omitted the nuclear issue, aligning with Iran’s phased approach. Concurrently, Iranian officials warned that any new American attacks would trigger escalation, including potential strikes on US interests and energy infrastructure, coordinated with regional allies. Iranian media also clarified that Trump’s characterisation of the strait’s status was misleading, reiterating that control would remain exclusive to Tehran. Notably, reports suggest American negotiators have privately urged Iranian counterparts to dismiss Trump’s public posts as "for domestic and media consumption."
The Hurdles to a Deal
Despite progress, three main obstacles loom. First, Trump’s need for a politically palatable outcome that can be spun as superior to the Obama-era JCPOA. Second, Tehran’s notorious intransigence in negotiations - a trait Trump himself acknowledged in 2020, tweeting, "Iran never won a war, but never lost a negotiation!" Third, and most crucially, staunch Israeli opposition to any deal that leaves Iran strengthened. While Trump appears determined to wind down the conflict, Israel is likely already planning its next moves should a truce take hold.
The Stakes of Surrender
The emerging framework, seen by many in Washington as a capitulation, would cement Iranian control over the world’s most critical oil chokepoint without resolving the nuclear dispute. It is viewed as a historic strategic setback for America, one that will accelerate a broader realignment of power in the Middle East. For an administration seeking an exit, the price of peace may be a defeat dressed in the garb of a deal - with the bill coming due in the form of a reshaped geopolitical order. As the White House looks to extricate itself, its gaze, and ambitions, may be turning westward. A subsequent post by Trump, simply stating "Hello, Greenland!", hints at where the empire might seek its recompense.
Trends for you
Most Popular Users
Elon Musk
@elonmusk
240.1M followers
Barack Obama
@barackobama
119.3M followers
Donald J. Trump
@realdonaldtrump
111.6M followers
Cristiano Ronaldo
@cristiano
108.8M followers
Narendra Modi
@narendramodi
106.9M followers
Rihanna
@rihanna
97.2M followers
NASA
@nasa
92.1M followers
Justin Bieber
@justinbieber
90.5M followers
KATY PERRY
@katyperry
86.7M followers
Taylor Swift
@taylorswift13
80.5M followers
Lady Gaga
@ladygaga
72.1M followers
Kim Kardashian
@kimkardashian
69.3M followers
YouTube
@youtube
68.6M followers
Virat Kohli
@imvkohli
68.4M followers
Bill Gates
@billgates
63.4M followers
The Ellen Show
@theellenshow
62.5M followers
CNN
@cnn
61.9M followers
Neymar Jr
@neymarjr
61M followers
X
@x
60.9M followers
CNN Breaking News
@cnnbrk
59.9M followers