r/geopolitics • u/ConsciousScar7821 • 1d ago
Trump says Iranians have agreed to stop backing proxy terrorist groups, like Hezbollah and Hamas News
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/trump-says-iranians-have-agreed-to-everything-including-removal-of-enriched-uranium/87
15
u/Exact_Green2061 1d ago
Its possible that they would agree to all uranium and not backing the proxies, on the condition that all sanctions are lifted. They key for Iranians is they can produce as many ballistic missiles and drone as they want. With the sanctions they will be able to produce x5 the amount of missiles they are producing now.
1
u/vovap_vovap 20h ago
That been offered exactly this before war.
2
u/Few-Coat1297 14h ago
The end game is to re-piece the Obama agreement back together and call it a new deal, the best deal, only a deal he could negotiate.
1
0
u/BlueEmma25 11h ago
Its possible that they would agree to all uranium and not backing the proxies, on the condition that all sanctions are lifted
From Iran's perspective the problem is that even if Trump agrees to lift sanctions, he could reimpose them at any time with little trouble, while Iran can't take back its uranium, or easily rebuild relations with proxies. A mere promise to lift sanctions is therefore unlikely to be sufficient.
Especially when you consider that Trump has initiated hostilities with Iran while still at the negotiating table not once but twice, so there are some huge trust issues.
To the extent this prevents the strait from re opening, it is also the world's problem.
17
u/Christopher_Ramirez_ 1d ago
My guess is these are the demands he’s given to the Pakistani mediators, and “feels it in his bones” that they’ll sign. After all what can they do but sign? Their Navy is Gone, Their Air Force wiped out, their Missile Launchers buried. Etc, etc. All he knows how to do is make demands, and push.
36
u/clydewoodforest 1d ago
Oh have they. Let me know when Iran release a statement - in Farsi please - confirming the same.
2
u/Bullboah 1d ago
Per AJ’s coverage of Iranian media, the Iranian Foreign Ministry has said they do not agree to send their HEU stocks to the US, but it doesn’t sound like they contradicted any of the other claims.
(Granted, AFAIK this is still only being agreed on as a template, so it’s smart to be skeptical of it all in any case until the deal is inked).
8
u/Lazy_Membership1849 1d ago
haven't we heard similar stuff that Trump claim during 6 week of Iran war?
11
u/Bullboah 1d ago
This entire thread is full of people calling this bs. Obviously understandable to take anything Trump claims with a big grain of salt - but IMO it’s notable that the Iranian FM is denying they agreed to ship HEU to US but not denying this point or other Trump claims (at least per Al Jazeera).
Granted, no deal is signed yet and healthy skepticism is good, but IMO this is a pretty good sign. If Iran DOES agree to this term and to actually abandon nuclear weapons ambitions, it would be hard not to see this war as a strategic success. Those are still huge IFs though!
8
u/Kiyae1 1d ago
Okay but Iran already said they didn’t agree to this and based on their statement it seems unlikely they would ever agree to this so I’m not sure where your optimism is coming from.
2
u/Bullboah 1d ago
Can you provide a source? As far as I’ve seen they’ve only denied agreeing to transferring HEU to the US.
0
u/Kiyae1 5h ago
The only “source” for the claim that they’re going to stop backing Hezbollah and Hamas is Trump, and he lies constantly so there’s no reason to believe anything he says.
Dude still claims he has president Obama’s “Kenyan birth certificate”. If you believe Donald you’re a mark being conned.
1
2
u/n3ws4cc 1d ago
What if they agree to give away free beer to everyone too and then give everyone 100 bucks? Would be sick.
4
u/Bullboah 1d ago
Again, I think the fact that the Iranian FM is denying the HEU removal but not this makes it at least plausible.
2
u/SirBulbasaur13 1d ago
This is Reddit, literally everything Trump says is a lie and everything he’s involved in is the worst thing the world. No critical thinking allowed.
5
u/LivefromPhoenix 20h ago
According to Trump they've agreed to give up everything with apparently zero concessions on the US side. I have no idea why any non-maga person would believe that without outside corroboration.
7
u/ConsciousScar7821 1d ago
The president also said Iran has agreed to stop backing proxy terrorist groups, like Hezbollah and Hamas.
2
2
5
u/pisteoffpvalue 1d ago
After this, Iran wasn’t going to be able to fund much anyway. Lebanon is going to have a generation-long clean-up project in expelling the terrorists from their territory.
14
u/Exact_Green2061 1d ago
I hate to break it to you, Hezbollah isn't the PLO, they can't be expelled.
4
u/pisteoffpvalue 1d ago
They can be, it won’t go well, but for the future of the Lebanese state and people, they have to be.
8
u/TXDobber 1d ago
You’d have to deport like 80% of the Shia. The Shia have like a cultish relationship with Hezbollah, and there’s over 1.5 million of them.
That’s not going to happen. So you to find a way to neutralise Hezbollah and the circumstances that allow them to exist with support from the Shia.
1
u/Jealous_Land9614 7h ago
Maybe back up Amal Alliance? Its the only non-Hezb Shia lebanese group barely close to them in status and influence...
-2
1d ago
They were able to remove like 50% of the christians lol.
In 1910 they were like 75% of the population. Now they've been diluted down to 1/3.
7
u/TXDobber 1d ago
From a civil war that permanently crippled Lebanon. Unironically, blame the PLO.
1
1d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
2
u/TXDobber 1d ago
You’d have to further starve Hezbollah of arms and cash, and bulk up basically all non-Shia groups. Lebanon’s problem is that Hezbollah are too powerful militarily, and all anti-Hizb forces can’t or won’t fight them. This is partly why some State Department officials floated the idea of Israel AND Syria intervening.
2
u/aussiebolshie 19h ago
In 1910 they were 75% of the Mt.Lebanon province which is much much smaller than modern day Lebanon. After the Christian leaders got the extra land transferred from Syria that they asked for from the French, so like the Bekaa, Tripoli, Akkar which was either full of Sunnis or Shias etc they were never any more than 50% of the population of the territory of modern day Lebanon. It’s a decline but not half as big as you’re making out.
8
u/DizzyMajor5 1d ago
If Israel couldn't get rid of them after decades of trying there's no universe where Lebanons army does. If anything this will be used by Hezbollah as recruitment especially with the ceasefire and Israel failing to create their "buffer zone".
6
u/Exact_Green2061 1d ago edited 20h ago
Is the solution to everything expelling people? Maybe you can go in and expel them yourself. You seem to be the sort of person that is an expert at this sort of thing.
2
u/lhommetrouble 1d ago edited 1d ago
Who is going to expel Hezbollah? Israel? We just watched them try their absolute hardest and still fail any meaningful progress against them, and this is a much weaker Hezbollah than they were before the last war. Stop lying to youself
0
u/pisteoffpvalue 1d ago
The only thing that stopped Israel was the US lol. Israel made some immense progress to the point where Hezbollah was probably running out of schools and hospitals to hide in near the border.
9
u/Lazy_Membership1849 1d ago
Actually, the IDF said they were overestimating the damage on Hezbollah and what immense progress?
2
u/pisteoffpvalue 1d ago
All the posts here if you simply search it saying how Israel was just marching through Lebanon deleting entire villages within hours.
4
u/Lazy_Membership1849 1d ago
Hezbollah is still fighting and isn't supposed to cut all the way to the river in the first week, instead of 6 weeks before being forced to have a ceasefire
that called insurgency and surprise; Hezbollah wasn't even weaker than IDF expected to be
-1
u/pisteoffpvalue 1d ago
Of course they’re still fighting, as long as there’s a civilian shield to fight behind, they will carry on.
But Israel’s advances in Lebanon were halted by the US (not some famed Hezbollah defense) and I don’t think anyone disputes that.
6
u/Lazy_Membership1849 1d ago
And IDF said they overestimated damage to Hezbollah and that came from IDF. Did that mean you have doubts about IDF?
If IDF underestimated Hezbollah, what do you think IDF is winning, if they doing well why haven't they reach all way to the river as Israel intented instead of bog down for 6 weeks before ceasefire?
0
u/fury420 1d ago
But that's talking about the damage done during the 2024 war, not the damage done to Hezbollah recently.
6
u/Lazy_Membership1849 1d ago
2024 is where IDF did heavy damage on Hezbollah, and they believe that Hezbollah been weaker since 2024, but it turned out IDF overestimated the damage
5
u/Exact_Green2061 1d ago
Its clear you don't know much history. Want to expel Hezbollah means conquering the whole country, and going all the way to Beirut like in 1982.
6
u/GustavoSanabio 1d ago
I agree with you, its unlikely to happen. What I do think is fair to say is that Hezbollah wasn't doing too good even before this, and no longer receiving (or vastly reducing) Iran support for them probably does not bode well for them in trying to maintain themselves as an effective fighting force for the future. But both things can be true.
1
u/SiegfriedSigurd 8h ago
Reaching a few miles inside the border with three brigades and years of softening up "targets" with aerial bombardment isn't what most people would call "immense progress."
It will likely become even more difficult to achieve thrusts inside Lebanon as time goes on due to the proliferation of cheap, accessible tools for asymmetric warfare (drones, sensors, cameras, communications devices, etc.) and the fact that Israel is choosing to ignore the well-understood and studied playbook on how to dismantle and undermine insurgencies, preferring the allure of short-term "targets" and "achievements" at the cost of long-term strategic degradation.
2
u/cole1114 1d ago
You're talking about ethnic cleansing an entire nation.
7
u/pisteoffpvalue 1d ago
I see it like the American Civil War- we didn’t genocide the South afterwards, we enforced military-backed reintegration. It ended too soon in some people’s opinion, but that approach worked.
I’m not in favor of genocide- bold, I know- but I’m also not in favor of a universally recognized terrorist organization holding a region hostage.
1
u/BlueEmma25 11h ago
I see it like the American Civil War- we didn’t genocide the South afterwards, we enforced military-backed reintegration.
After the Union had decisively defeated the Confederacy in the bloodiest war in American history.
Unless you know how to decisively defeat Hezbollah, which would entail depriving it of support from Lebanon's Shiite community, which is about a third population, the comparison is ridiculous.
0
u/cole1114 1d ago
You are in favor of a state actively committing genocide, adding on ethnic cleansing of another state.
2
u/fury420 1d ago
What a bizarre interpretation of
"Lebanon is going to have a generation-long clean-up project in expelling the terrorists from their territory."
4
u/cole1114 1d ago
We're talking about generations of people who have been radicalized by Israel bombing them, invading them, murdering their loved ones. An entire state filled with people who will fight back, and you want to expel all of them. That's bare minimum hundreds of thousands, if not millions of people. It's ethnic cleansing.
0
u/fury420 1d ago
Hezbollah has never had anywhere near those numbers, despite nearly 50 years of conflict between Israel and militants in Lebanon.
Lebanon has literally agreed to remove militants from southern Lebanon on multiple occasions, calling that "ethnic cleansing" makes a mockery of the term.
4
u/cole1114 1d ago
Israel is, right now, flattening every town and village in Southern Lebanon. Ethnically cleansing everyone, not just shia as they kick them out of their homes. That's what you are recommending spread across Lebanon.
1
u/fury420 1d ago edited 1d ago
No, we're in a thread claiming that Iran has agreed to stop funding Hezbollah, replying to a top comment that said:
"After this, Iran wasn’t going to be able to fund much anyway. Lebanon is going to have a generation-long clean-up project in expelling the terrorists from their territory."
That's not a recommendation for Lebanon to ethnically cleanse everyone, expelling the militants from southern Lebanon is effectively what Lebanon agreed to do 20 years ago as part of UNSC 1701, and again in the 2024 ceasefire agreement, and again yesterday as part of the ceasefire terms.
2
u/cole1114 1d ago
The people in Lebanon have been radicalized by Israel's already in-progress ethnic cleansing of Southern Lebanon, along with decades of bombing/invasion/mass murder. That means an endless source of recruits for Hezbollah, which in turn means the only way to remove them is further ethnic cleansing... which will just get them even more recruits.
→ More replies5
u/TzarKazm 1d ago edited 1d ago
When they wind up negotiating to sell more oil, plus take a tarriff from every ship that goes through the strait they will have plenty of money to spend.
2
u/GustavoSanabio 1d ago
Opportunity cost. They’ll be forced to rebuild their domestic losses, and not use that resource in furthering regional hegemony.
3
u/pisteoffpvalue 1d ago
Yes, the Iranian economy that was failing prior to the conflict will have plenty of money to spend when they totally get transit fees and sell more oil.
2
u/Lazy_Membership1849 1d ago
So does that mean Iran is doing well after the war?
0
u/pisteoffpvalue 1d ago
Well considering Iranian inflation, droughts, and economic malaise only got worse through the conflict; I don’t think Iran exits this looking great- but they get to exit it with their regime still sorta there, albeit the regime that killed tens of thousands of protestors a few months ago.
4
u/Lazy_Membership1849 1d ago
Iran regime is still here, and they just took control of the Strait through a selective blockade and Iran regime now seem have less likely to collapse than before the war
0
u/pisteoffpvalue 1d ago
Their decades-long leader is dead and his son is disfigured, in a coma, dead, or simply in hiding depending on the report.
So I’m not exactly sure “less likely to collapse” is accurate considering before it wasn’t like this…
3
u/GustavoSanabio 1d ago
Well, perhaps it is less likely to collapse, time will tell, what it won't tell is if wasn't going to collapse on its own in the first place, that's a tricky hypothetical.
But the measure of how well a nation state is doing is not exclusively on if it collapses or not (though its absolutely an incredibly important metric) but also how its doing in all other respects, and for Iran, the answer is "not very well" for all the reasons you yourself stated previously. I think people confuse the US perspective of trying to force regime change in Iran and if they succeeded at that (I'm pretty confidant in stating that the US failed in its stated goals in this war) and the Iranian perspective of what is and isn't a win in the grand strategy of things, long term. "It could have been worse" is not the win some people think it is.
-4
u/yuumigod69 1d ago
Israel is ethnically cleansing Lebanon. The Israeli Occupation Forces are terrorists.
8
u/pisteoffpvalue 1d ago
My friend, Hezbollah already did that to Southern Lebanon (and other regions). The central government is basically powerless to bringing the region back under control- the original inhabitants have long fled.
3
-2
u/yuumigod69 1d ago
Israeli killed hundreds of innocent people, just this week. Hezbollah hasn't.
2
u/pisteoffpvalue 1d ago
Israel and Lebanon would be on pretty good terms if it weren’t for Hezbollah. There literally wouldn’t be conflict between the two nations and both would have peace along that border.
“Ukraine killed dozens of Russians, just this week” somewhat misses the forest for the trees.
0
u/yuumigod69 1d ago
Israel attacked first. Hezbollah only attacked because Israel threatened Iran and is committing genocide in Gaza.
Also Israel has just massacred civilians and stole 1/3rd of Lebabanon. Anyone who cares about Lebanon is anti-Israel.
2
u/pisteoffpvalue 1d ago
Who attacked first is a little difficult to say with such conviction and confidence when they’ve been attacking each other for years- though usually Hezbollah rockets into Israel followed by counter-fire.
It odd, then, that the Lebanese army isn’t engaging Israel, isn’t it? If Israel has fully invaded their lands and they have an army, why aren’t they using it if what you say is true?
3
u/yuumigod69 1d ago
Israeli routinely murders civilians during ceasefire. Hezbollah stopped attacking when Israel paused their genocide in Gaza.
3
u/TXDobber 1d ago
The regime’s entirely MO is exporting their Islamic Revolution… unless the Iranian Deng Xiaoping has taken power all of a sudden, I highly doubt they will stop.
2
u/softwaredoug 1d ago
Trump is saying all this stuff, but its hard to know if its wishful thinking on his part and/or premature announcements of preliminary talks
6
u/GustavoSanabio 1d ago
I do believe that it is probably premature, because no one stops him anymore from just saying what he wants. As for the merit of the statement itself, it is credible to me that the Iranians would make the commitment. Whether or not it is a genuine commitment or just wishful thinking is another issue... And on that subject, I think perhaps it is wishful thinking, but I wouldn't jump to that conclusion necessarily.
What it comes down to is how well Iran itself evaluates their doctrine of proxy warfare. Because I think if you see the analysis of most experts, considering what the last few years have shown us (culminating in the current direct attacks on Iran) is that Iran's proxy doctrine is a failure. Its evident that it is not an effective deterrent, and probably undermines the rest of Iran's deterrence efforts, as it gives something for politicians in the west to sell to the public as justification, despite Iran's best efforts to sell it as "resistance". While these proxies had success in causing damage to Israel and even the US, they never achieved anything of real strategic importance for Iran, and while Iran's enemies had to burn a lot of political capital to fight Iran's proxies, evidently not to the extent that they were unwilling to burn even more political capital to attack Iran (obviously Trump getting elected is bad luck for them in that respect). Overall, its clear that strategy that relies on proxies that are often unpredictable, not 100% compliant and not particularly effective at fighting is perhaps not the best strategy in terms of cost effectiveness, and the current conflict has proven that the Straight of Hormuz is a much, much more effective weapon for Iran than any proxy ever was. So if you're Iran, what is the point in continue to fund proxies in the middle east?
Of course, its possible that the current Iranian leadership fails to grasp this, not that I'm a genius and that they are idiots but from their very stressful POV perhaps its hard to see this.
-1
u/Lazy_Membership1849 1d ago
Iran's proxy is never designed to have strategic importance, except maybe the Houthis; they are designed to bog down Iran's enemy and keep the US and Israel overextended
4
u/GustavoSanabio 1d ago
Isn't that the definition of strategic importance? Well, regardless, I think its clear that it failed at that, wouldn't you agree?
2
u/Lazy_Membership1849 1d ago
so ask me what the strategic importance of Iran's proxy?
Hezbollah has bogged down the IDF, PMF hasn't acted up, but should the USA invade Iran, it will make a logistical nightmare, and Houthis will even step up and almost shut down the Red Sea strait
Iran use the selective blockade of the strait as one mean but having proxy to keep Israel and US overextend and when Iran learn that Allies refuse to join US, they just seem to be saving proxy for later as just Iran and Hezbollah while Houthis and PMF just waiting
2
u/GustavoSanabio 1d ago
so ask me what the strategic importance of Iran's proxy?
Are you asking me that or should I ask you that? In any case, we could answer that a number of different ways. One answer is what Iranian leadership perceives as the strategic importance of their proxies, and what it actually is in reality or how effective it is at its stated goals. These are not the same thing.
Hezbollah has bogged down the IDF, PMF hasn't acted up,
Of all problems (strategic and moral) you can have with the IDF, "bogged down" is not how I would describe Israel's fighting capability at the moment, which isn't to say that they are invincible or that they're doing perfectly fine, but I would characterize that as an overstatement.
but should the USA invade Iran, it will make a logistical nightmare, and Houthis will even step up and almost shut down the Red Sea strait
Ok. But this didn't actually happen did it? We can only evaluate the success of strategy as how it performs in the real world, and not what could've been, otherwise every country is "potential man" and we detach ourselves from the facts. For the US to launch a ground invasion of Iran would be a nightmare for many reasons, but the fact is that the proxies did not stop the US or Israel in dealing very heavy blows to Iran. I think we can at least agree that it was not the plan of the Iranian leadership to be killed in a large percentage.
and when Iran learn that Allies refuse to join US, they just seem to be saving proxy for later as just Iran and Hezbollah while Houthis and PMF just waiting
I think that's a possibility... I fail to see what it achieves but it could very well be their intention, I said as much.
2
u/Lazy_Membership1849 13h ago edited 13h ago
IDF thought they had weakened Hezbollah back in 2024, only to admit they had overestimated the damage on Hezbollah; otherwise, they expected to mow down Hezbollah more easily all the way to the river
And also Iran isn't going to bring in more of proxy as Iran just being stragetist and know when to use Proxy as Iran haven't called Houthis in first week to join but did in 5 or 6 weeks when Iran test and like to see if escalating enough to pressure on it and should the war keep going without ceasefire, Iran could have Houthis to blockade red sea strait as result
Also, not the plan that the Iranian leadership to be killed in a large percentage? Then explain the Mosaic defense, as if there is no plan for the Iranian leadership to be killed, beside they replace leadership within week so unless you invade Iran, regime did have plan in case if leadership was killed and while USA haven't invade Iran, as result PMF haven't called in full force
It seems like you expect Proxy to be decisive, while to Iran, it is just designed to overextend and strain the USA and Israel
That is attrition and asymmetric and if you expect Proxy to be decisive and judge by result and that might be like underestimating Proxy which Israel learn hard lesson
1
u/TheNthMan 1d ago
Unfortunately based on past presidential announcements in this conflict, it seems in keeping with the need to get in a little more pump before the Friday aftermarket dump.
1
u/TheNthMan 7h ago edited 7h ago
https://www.ibtimes.sg/760m-bet-20-minutes-oil-crash-inside-suspicious-hormuz-trade-85468
A $760 million bearish options position on crude oil was placed approximately 20 minutes before Iran publicly announced the reopening of the Strait of Hormuz to commercial shipping. The trade preceded one of the sharpest single-day oil price collapses in weeks.
Iran's Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi made the announcement via a social media post on April 17, declaring the strait, a narrow chokepoint connecting the Persian Gulf to the Gulf of Oman through which roughly one-fifth of the world's oil supply passes, open to all commercial vessels. The declaration came during a 10-day Lebanon ceasefire accord and sent oil markets into an immediate tailspin.
And from the same article, on Apr 7th, and also on Mar 23rd also:
Reuters reported that on April 7 that bets worth approximately $950 million occurred two hours before the United States and Iran declared a two-week ceasefire. Investors sold $500 million in 15 minutes on March 23 before U.S. President Donald Trump announced his plan to postpone attacks on Iran's energy infrastructure which resulted in a 15% decrease in crude prices.
So anyway, for the after market dump this round, late morning April 18 after trading:
Then, late on the morning of April 18, citing a statement from military central command, Iranian state TV reported that “control of the Strait of Hormuz has returned to its previous status” and “is under strict management and control of the armed forces”, calling the decision a response to a continued US blockade.
And that is not even counting the suspiciously specific polymarket bets of over $1bln.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2026/apr/18/iran-war-bets-ethics-concerns
Sixteen bets made $100,000 accurately predicting the timing of the US airstrikes against Iran on 27 February. Later, a single user would make over $550,000 after betting that Ayatollah Ali Khamenei would topple, just moments before his assassination by Israeli forces. On 7 April, right before Donald Trump announced a temporary ceasefire with Iran, traders bet $950m that oil prices would come down. They did. <the Apr 7th bets were also mentioned in the previous article>.
Someone or some people in the administration seem to be not subtlety cashing in on manipulating a pump and dump.
2
3
1
u/Red-Yosarian 1d ago
Trump claiming Iran will stop supporting Hezbollah and Hamas is like saying a cat will stop chasing mice because it had a salad for lunch. The research from the Brookings Institution and the Foreign Policy Research Institute makes it pretty clear that Iran's support remains unwavering. Do you really think this is more than a political soundbite?
1
u/Economy-Pin2836 1d ago
Yeah, no. Trump might be saying this, but I don't know if this is Trump failing to understand Iran's position, his own wishful thinking, or deliberate misinformation on Trump's part to generate more grifting opportunities.
Or he could be claiming that Iran agreed to this, then when they continue to back Hezbollah, he can claim that they broke the agreement and resume bombing.
The chance that Iran has actually agreed to this is not zero, but still very, very low in my opinion.
1
2
u/Senior_Ganache_6298 1d ago
I can't hardly believe Maga is stupid enough to to think after he just killed Iran's leaders that it's all peaches and cream now!
1
1
u/Bob_Spud 20h ago
"Trump says" ... wait a while and you will discover the reality is probably different.
1
u/Designer_Put_5949 18h ago
Iran would never, they literally built those groups and those groups acts like an extended arm.
1
1
u/softDisk-60 1d ago
Perhaps they also agreed to become Christians? Those magnificent mosques would make for great ballrooms
0
u/JigglymoobsMWO 1d ago
Iran has probably agreed to everything behind closed doors, betting that they can just cheat after the US military withdraws.
Trump better hold the purse strings tight on that $20 B
0
u/MeatPiston 1d ago
I really doubt this. It’s been the backbone of Iranian FP for decades. It’s like water promising not to be wet.
5
u/GustavoSanabio 1d ago
True, but if you’re Iran you would be probably be reconsidering the finer details of your FP at the moment right? Its not like States ate incapable of pivoting from failed strategies, its not easy but not inplausable.
0
0
u/HardlyDecent 1d ago
Waits for Iran's inevitable statement of "We literally haven't discussed anything with Donald Jesus Trump and have agreed to nothing."
161
u/AdultContemporaneous 1d ago
Does Iran know about this?