IMO, the commentators on the ceasefire talks whom I have listened to have, for the most part, overlook some of the significant factors that contribute to how the ceasefire talks will pan out. I will cover a few of those missed factors below.
The first factor that is overlooked are the criteria that Trump uses to measure success. Theses criteria were mentioned in an earlier article posted on this blog (click here for the article). Those criteria are domination and acquisition. Unless Trump can compel Iran to accept a subordinate role in the negotiations, what Iran proposes will be considered to be not in good faith by the Trump team. And Trumpˋs negotiation team will either pursue its perceived dominant position until Iran submits or it will eventually give up and consider a new framework and set of proposals. On the other hand, Iran is merely looking to be treated as an equal partner in the any set of talks and that includes looking to whether it can survive in tact with any set of conditions that it accepts.
Trumpˋs assumed position of superiority in the ceasefilre talks is based on entitlement. That sense of entitlement is based on its superior advantages in relying on the rule of force.
One might excuse Trump taking the above approach because he is dealing with an adversary. However, that was Trump's approach to negotiating new trade deals with now formerly close allies. He used threats of high tariffs to try to compel nations into trade deals that they did not favor.
And so, what are called 'maximalist' conditions, will be more strongly required because the more such conditions an opponent accepts, the more that Trump will seek to control his opponents. Note here how Trump responds to another party whom he could not dominate. For example, Trump could never dominate Russia which is why Trump has insisted that only Zelensky make concessions in his negotiations with Russia. And so far he has given up on acquiring Greenland.
And so what we can expect is that Trump will insist that only Iran will make concessions to his 15 part peace proposal in their ceasefire talks until he realizes that there are limits to his ability to control Iran's responses.
We should also note that Trump has expressed desires to take Iran's oil for himself (a.k.a., America, according to Trump). That is what he did with Venzuela.
Another factor we should note, and I picked this up from reading a headline from a foreign source, is that Trump is a better at marketing than business. Here we should note that Trump is always marketing something or someone. And though that is not uncommon among public figures, he does that to such an extreme degree that has not been seen done by past American Presidents.. One reason for his compulsion to constantly market himself and others is that, like an overweight person who constantly overeats, he constantly seek affirmation.
We should note that the driving force behind Trumpˋs efforts to market himself and his opponents is the effect he can cause. And results in truth and facts being regarded as completely irrelevant in terms of his marketer tactics. That is because the purpose of his marketing is to win the public to his side and make it opposed to his opponents. And so truth and facts are replaced by convenient claims when Trump markets either himself or his opponents.
That truth and facts have little to nothing to do with Trumpˋs marketing of himself and others can be seen in 3 of his most recent controversial statements. When the Pope called on all nations to favor dialogue to violence and condemned those who rely on war, Trump said that the Pope did not care if Iran obtained a nuclear weapon and would blow up the world. Based on the Popeˋs statements about U.S. immigration policies, Trump claimed that the Pope was soft on crime. Of course the purpose of such marketing is to imply that Trumpˋs policies are the only standard to be used to determine if one is against both Iranˋs dangerous aspirations and crime.
Another example can be seen in Trumpˋs post that has him dressed as Jesus while he heals someone. Trump claimed that his post depicted himself as a doctor, not Jesus. But if that is so, then why was Trump dressed in clothing that we normally associate with how Jesus dressed? Trump also claimed that only the fake news would interpret the picture as Trump portraying himself as Jesus. In reality, Trump took down the post after many Maga Christians complained about it.
Another example can be seen when Trump was questioned about the bombing of an Iranian school that killed around 165 children. When asked about it, he said that that school was hit by a malfunctioning Iranian missile. Forensic evidence has proven Trump to be wrong.
These examples show how Trumpˋs marketing of himself and his opponents is so often based on convenient, and unproven, claims rather being based on truth and facts. This kind of marketing by Trump is not a recent approach. It has been Trumpˋs approach to marketing himself and other from the beginning of his entry into the political arena. For example, from early on his his 2016 Presidential campaign, Trump claimed that the only way he could lose the Presidential election was if the election was fraudulent. In other marketing statements, he has called Marxists, ˋvermin.ˋ He has called the press ˋthe enemy of the people.ˋ And he has constantly berated Democrats and SCOTUS justices who ruled against his policies.
The question for the American people is when will they catch on to Trumpˋs marketing approach. When? Will it be now when Trump has marketing people like the Pope and those MAGA Christians who complained about the pic that very much looks like it was portraying Trump as Jesus? Or will they look at those examples as exceptions to the rule?
Until Trump can compel Iran to act as a subordinate in the ceasefire talks, he will not only push Iran in that direction, he will market Iranˋs proposals negatively so that the American public will only blame Iran should the ceasefire fail. Currently, Trump is employing a blockade of the Gulf of Hormuz to pressure Iran into submission.
Should that fail, Trump will look for the first or best exit ramp that can be most easily marketed as a complete victory for himself and surrender by Iran.
There is one other factor that should be included here. That factor are the goals and approaches taken by Israel. That is because Israel is co-participant in the war against Iran. In addition, from all appearances, Israel seems to have somewhat different goals in this war than the U.S. does. Israelˋs goals would have a more pervasive effect on Iran that those of the U.S. That is because Israel appears to follow its own version of the Bush Doctrine which came into play after 9é11.
In that doctrine, Netanyahuˋs government wants to eliminate all emerging threats in its region. And by the word ˋthreats,ˋ that doctrine really means competitors. And so those that could compete with Israel both in terms of being technologically advanced and having a powerful military are automatically regarded as threats.
Added to that is if Netanyahuˋs government is in alignment with the ˋGreater Israelˋproject that calls on Israel to possess the land between the Nile to the Euphrates river, then Israel would want its immediate neighbors to be decimated both in terms of technological advancement and military power.
Should Netanyahuˋs goal become part of Trumpˋs goals, then there will be no permanent ceasefire between Iran and the combo of the U.S. and Israel until Israel reaches its goals.
Certainly Iran is not an innocent party in this war. Its oppression of many of its own people testifies to that. And yes, Iran sponsors terrorism. But here we should note that the IDF practices terrorism and is more of a threat to the Palestinian people. And so there are no ˋgood guysˋin this war. However, Americans should be more concerned with Trumpˋs flaws than Irans because what foreign policy goes around, often comes around in domestic policy.
