The Obvious Midsummer Twist In The Negotiations With Iran

It was always clear how the war in Iran would end.

Any fool could have predicted the conclusion. In fact, this fool did. On March 9, I wrote in my column here at Above the Law: “The war in Iran will be over from the American side no later than June 1.”

Bingo!

The U.S. and Iran reached a ceasefire on April 8 and signed a memorandum of understanding on June 17.  Not a bad prediction, I’d say.

But I anticipated more: I predicted that the United States would no longer be bombing Iran. I predicted that Donald Trump would declare victory. And I said that I had no clue what would have happened on the Iranian side. We knew only that the United States would be out of the war before the war could start seriously affecting the midterm elections.

Of course, my crystal ball was a  little cloudy. I did not foresee that the U.S. would end the war without having achieved any of the goals that Trump announced when we began fighting: No destruction of Iranian missiles. No ensuring that Iran will not have a nuclear weapon. No stopping terrorist proxies. No freedom for the Iranian people. Surely no “UNCONDITIONAL SURRENDER!” The only thing the memorandum of understanding categorically achieves for the United States is the reopening of the Strait of Hormuz, which was open before the war started.

So far, we’ve lost.

Where do we go from here?

Funny you should ask:  Here’s my next prediction. 

The MOU sets a 60-day period for the U.S. and Iran to negotiate the details of (i.e., everything having to do with) the end of the war. Sixty days from now, we’ll learn that the U.S. and Iran need more time to negotiate. (You don’t have to be Einstein to predict this. It took the Obama administration years to negotiate the original nuclear deal. It will surely take more than 60 days to negotiate a new nuclear deal plus the many other issues that are now being discussed — especially since Iran has reason to stall.)

Here’s the interesting part of my new prediction: The U.S. will ask Iran to extend the 60-day period for negotiations. Perhaps the U.S. will ask for an additional 90 days, which would push the end of the negotiations past the midterms. Iran will agree to this extension only if the United States immediately makes very substantial concessions. For example, Iran might agree to extend the 60-day negotiating period if the U.S. authorized some tens of billions of dollars of sanctions relief, all payable to Iran very promptly.

Trump, terrified of dropping more bombs (or having the Strait of Hormuz closed again) just before the midterms, will agree to substantial concessions.

After the midterms, all bets are off. Trump may find his courage and start bombing again. Or maybe he won’t. Iran knows this. And Iran doesn’t trust Trump, for good reason: Trump lies as easily as he breathes. He’s ignored laws governing foreign trade, such as the U.S.-Mexico-Canada Agreement (the successor to NAFTA). Iran perceives Trump to have twice bombed Iran while it was in negotiations with the U.S. If you were Iran, you wouldn’t trust Trump, either.

But Iran knows that Trump will never ignore the restraint imposed by the midterms. Trump cannot afford to drop more bombs, or have the Strait closed, between now and the elections. 

So Iran will insist on cash on the barrelhead. Benefits must arrive before November 2, 2026.

Trump has said that he agreed to end the war to avoid cratering the world economy. He didn’t want to become the next Herbert Hoover.

Congratulations, Donald! You’re not the next Herbert Hoover.

Instead, you’re a cross between Benedict Arnold and the guy who designed the lifeboats on the Titanic.

---

Mark Herrmann spent 17 years as a partner at a leading international law firm and later oversaw litigation, compliance and employment matters at a large international company. He is the author of The Curmudgeon’s Guide to Practicing Law and Drug and Device Product Liability Litigation Strategy (affiliate links). You can reach him by email at [email protected].