«Данное сообщение (материал) создано и (или) распространено иностранным средством массовой информации, выполняющим функции иностранного агента, и (или) российским юридическим лицом, выполняющим функции иностранного агента»
Topic: Diplomacy Blog Brand: Middle East Watch Region: Middle East Tags: China, Donald Trump, Iran, Iran Nuclear Program, Iran War, Israel, Russia, and United States For Donald Trump, Declaring Victory Over Iran Is His Best Option April 7, 2026 By: Eric Alter
Share
So far, attempts to negotiate a comprehensive US-Iran agreement have been stymied by maximalist demands.
According to most reports, diplomatic efforts to end the Iran War have fizzled out. Iran appears to have ended indirect negotiations, following President Donald Trump’s ominous and demented threats to destroy “a whole civilization” if Iran fails to reopen the Strait of Hormuz by his 8 p.m. Eastern Time deadline on Tuesday, April 7. This was piled on earlier threats to destroy Iran’s power plants, bridges, and critical infrastructure.
The various proposals to end the conflict are too maximalist to ensure success. The US demands for ending the war have featured some combination of Iran scrapping its enriched uranium stockpile, cutting ties with its proxy militias, ending the Hormuz blockade, and gutting its missile program. Tehran’s conditions include security guarantees, an end to economic sanctions, and reparations for wartime damages. Since neither side will accept those terms, the result is diplomatic theater, the illusion of progress while the actual war continues and intensifies.
At this stage, instead of chasing an impossible grand bargain, the smarter question is simple: What does each side actually need before it can walk away?
For the United States and Israel, the non-negotiable bottom line is clear—Iran’s nuclear breakout capability must be verifiably and permanently destroyed. The proxies and missiles are secondary.
Even if that goal is reached, nothing is truly fixed. Iran’s nuclear program would be slowed but not stopped. Its proxy network is bloodied but will survive. And Israel, unlike the United States, has no easy exit. It would be left facing a wounded but still dangerous enemy with no American shield.
That’s the massive hole every current proposal ignores. Any deal that actually worked would need ironclad, multilaterally enforced security guarantees—the kind the Budapest Memorandum never delivered for Ukraine. The only powers Tehran might trust more than Washington are China and Russia.
Beijing has every reason to step in. China is Iran’s largest oil customer and has invested billions in the country through the Belt and Road Initiative. A nuclear Iran or a never-ending Middle East war would threaten its energy lifelines and trade routes. Acting as a guarantor would also hand Beijing real leverage over Tehran, Washington, and the entire post-war setup—exactly the kind of great-power play it’s been looking for.
Russia’s motives are narrower but still significant. Iranian drones are helping sustain its Ukraine conflict, but a nuclear-armed Iran creates its own problems in Central Asia and unsettles its partners. Negotiating a deal would also give Russian President Vladimir Putin something he rarely finds: a convenient way to regain international respect.
A realistic agreement could require Iran to verifiably dismantle its nuclear weapons program, transfer its enriched uranium to a third country, and accept strict international inspections for a limited civilian nuclear program. In return, it would get security assurances and sanctions relief. Proxy militias would be handled separately.
It is not perfect for anyone. Israel would have to drop hopes of regime change. Washington would have to accept commitments that go beyond what Trump likely wants. Tehran would face tougher inspections than under the 2015 deal. And China and Russia would have to act as honest guarantors, a role neither has ever fully played. But both have practical reasons to make it work rather than watch the region slide into full nuclear chaos.
Still, there is a far simpler path that none of the formal frameworks even considers because it requires no negotiations at all: President Trump declares victory and walks away.
Trump has to declare victory at this point. The ingredients are already in place. He can still credibly claim he set Iran’s nuclear program back, destroyed much of its navy and air force, hammered its missile sites, and eliminated key regime figures. His April 1 speech already laid the groundwork by signaling that the main objectives were nearly met.
Continuing the war is becoming a political liability. Oil prices could push the economy into recession. A missile strike that kills American troops or a hostage situation that drags on could shift public opinion overnight. With negotiations going nowhere, staying in the fight offers only downsides.
Most current diplomatic conversations completely ignore this very real possibility. Instead of facing it head-on, mediators keep chasing an impossible solution. They are missing the most likely outcome: this war will not be ended by any agreement. It will end when a president decides the story is over.
That is not how wars usually end. But it may be exactly how this one does.
About the Author: Eric Alter
Eric Alter is the dean of the Anwar Gargash Diplomatic Academy in Abu Dhabi and a professor of international law and diplomacy, as well as a member of the Council on Foreign Relations. A former United Nations civil servant and a senior consultant/team leader with various international organizations, including the WTO, the World Bank, IFC, UNDP, UNEP, and FAO. Professor Alter has been seconded abroad and has worked with embassies in an advisory capacity, particularly in Aden, Beirut, and Cairo. He received his PhD from Paris I Pantheon-Sorbonne.
The post For Donald Trump, Declaring Victory Over Iran Is His Best Option appeared first on The National Interest.
Источник: nationalinterest.org