WASHINGTON -- After US President Donald Trump said he is postponing potential strikes on Iran, questions are mounting over whether Washington and Tehran are edging closer to a deal or simply buying time before a wider regional confrontation.
In an interview with RFE/RL, Mark Cancian, senior adviser with the Defense and Security Department at Center for Strategic and International Studies, said the Trump administration is focused on finding an "exit" from the crisis -- even as major disagreements remain over sanctions, nuclear restrictions, and Iran's claims over the Strait of Hormuz.
Cancian argued that while many of Iran's reported demands are nonstarters, there are signs both sides may be narrowing differences on a possible nuclear arrangement and maritime de-escalation.
RFE/RL: Trump says he's holding off on Iran attacks at the request of Gulf states. What does that tell you about where diplomacy stands?
Mark Cancian: Apparently the Iranians have sent another proposal to the United States. It's not clear what's in that one, but that is one element of Trump's decision: He has always wanted to get a negotiated end to the war. He believes he has the upper hand and negotiations will produce an acceptable compromise. Several times he has called off prospective military operations in favor of negotiations. We'll see if anything comes of this new Iranian proposal.
RFE/RL: Reports suggest Tehran is demanding war reparations, sanctions relief, and recognition of sovereignty over the Strait of Hormuz. From a US negotiating standpoint, are those opening positions or outright nonstarters?
Cancian: There are certainly some nonstarters. But there is a deal that could be made. They've closed the gap on nuclear capabilities, including the possibility of Iran sending at least some of its material to a third party and guaranteeing it won't enrich uranium for a period of time. Trump wanted, I think, 20 years. They don't want to go that long -- maybe 10 years, something like that.
Both sides would need to lift their blockade of the strait. Maybe Iran continues to claim sovereignty as long as it doesn't try to exercise it and the United States relieves some sanctions, maybe on oil. I don't think there would be any chance of reparations, but that might be a deal both sides could live with. It's edged toward that, at least on the nuclear side.
RFE/RL: If Tehran is tying negotiations to control over the Strait of Hormuz, does the crisis shift from a nuclear confrontation into a global energy security crisis?
Cancian: Energy security is certainly a key element, but it's a broader question than that. There are many straits around the world where countries might choose to claim sovereignty. Think of the Strait of Malacca and Indonesia, for example. There are many others.
If Iran can claim sovereignty over this strait, then other countries will likely do the same, and we'll have a very chaotic international situation -- very disruptive to shipborne commerce, but also creating the potential for conflict, since many countries would not recognize those claims.
RFE/RL: How seriously should the world take the possibility that Iran could militarize the strait further by imposing tolls or restricting access?
Cancian: They're already doing that. They restrict access, and the only vessels they allow through are those of friendly countries or countries that have paid a toll or transit fee or something similar.
Now, the US doesn't accept that. Most countries don't accept that. But that's where we are right now, and that's what the United States has to prevent in any final agreement.
RFE/RL: Trump appears to be balancing deterrence with delay. Is postponing an attack a sign of strategic patience or evidence the administration is searching for an exit ramp?
Cancian: There's no question the administration is looking for an exit. They very much want to end the conflict. They're facing elections in the fall. The economy is doing fine, but gas prices are up, and that's causing stress for US citizens.
So they've made several diplomatic approaches to try to make a deal, but so far that has not succeeded.
RFE/RL: China signaled this week its opposition to any Iranian effort to weaponize the strait. Did Chinese President Xi Jinping just distance Beijing from Tehran?
Cancian: I don't think so. He did say the strait should remain open. China uses the strait extensively, and they buy a lot of oil from the region, so they have an interest in keeping it open.
But he didn't agree to pressure Iran. He didn't denounce the Iranian regime. And our understanding is that China is still providing some covert support to Iran. So I don't think Beijing is distancing itself in any major way.
RFE/RL: Six months from now, what's the more likely headline: a new Middle East deterrence deal or a regional conflict spilling beyond the Strait of Hormuz? Are we still trying to prevent a wider war, or simply manage escalation one step at a time?
Cancian: Things that cannot go on forever don't. In this case, a blockade of oil leaving the Gulf and a blockade of materials going into Iran, cannot continue indefinitely. Both sides will increasingly feel the economic pressure, so there will be more and more pressure to make a deal.
By six months, that will have to happen. I thought it would have happened by now. At some point there will be a deal both sides can live with. The question is simply how long it takes and what that deal ultimately looks like.
