Trump refused an ultimatum to Iran under the pretext of negotiating. What the media is writing

US President Donald Trump announced that he was negotiating with Iran, and this was the reason to postpone for five days the ultimatum presented in connection with the closure of the Strait of Hormuz. At the same time, Tehran denies any dialogue with Washington. Nevertheless, the White House hopes to reach an agreement on ending the war with the Speaker of the Iranian parliament, Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf. What the media write about the US attempts to end the conflict is in the Izvestia digest.

Bloomberg: Trump began negotiations with Iran after warning of disaster

According to sources familiar with the situation, Trump's decision to drop his threat to destroy Iran's energy infrastructure was made after U.S. allies and Gulf states privately warned the president of the dangers associated with carrying out this threat. On March 23, the US president announced that he was giving Iran a five-day reprieve from the actions threatening it, pointing to new negotiations with Tehran, which, in his opinion, could contribute to the conclusion of an agreement resolving the conflict.

According to a source familiar with the situation, the Trump administration seems to believe that Iran would be willing to negotiate if the United States makes it clear that it is ready for them, but the allies fear that this may not be so easy. Negotiations between an unnamed Iranian official, Trump's son-in-law Jared Kushner and adviser Steve Witkoff began on March 21 and continued until the next day, Trump said. According to the US president, Tehran has agreed to transfer nuclear materials to the country and not resume its nuclear program.

Politico: The Trump administration considers the speaker of the Iranian parliament as a leader

The Trump administration is secretly considering the speaker of the Iranian parliament as a potential partner and even a future leader of the country. Mohammed Bagher Ghalibaf, 64, who has repeatedly threatened the United States and its allies with retaliatory measures, is considered by at least some in the White House to be a promising partner capable of leading Iran and negotiating with the Trump administration on the next stage of the war.

The administration's interest in finding a negotiating partner indicates a desire to find a way out of the quagmire into which Iran has quickly plunged, shaking world markets, sharply undermining oil prices and rekindling concerns about inflation. And this hints at the answer to a crucial question when the United States and Israel destroyed the leadership of Tehran: who will be next?

Reuters: Iran calls Trump's statements about the talks "fake news"

Trump announced that the United States and Iran had held "very good and productive" talks on a "full and comprehensive settlement of hostilities in the Middle East." As a result, he said, he is postponing for five days the plan to strike the Iranian energy system. His statement led to a sharp drop in oil prices. However, on March 24, the influential speaker of the Iranian parliament, Mohammed Bagher Ghalibaf, who, according to sources, was the mediator in the negotiations on the Iranian side, said that no negotiations had been held.

On Monday night, global markets recovered after Trump extended the ultimatum demanding the opening of the Strait of Hormuz. However, this reversal appeared to be in jeopardy as markets began to reconsider conflicting statements from Tehran and Washington. U.S. Treasury bond yields rose, and the dollar regained lost ground. Brent crude futures rose 4.2% to $104.21 per barrel, partially offsetting a 10% drop.

The New York Times: Trump took the chance to reject the ultimatum

Iranian officials have publicly denied conducting any negotiations on the terms of ending the war, and American officials have said that the contacts are at a very early stage and are not substantive. But Trump used the beginning of even an early dialogue as a way out of the situation when he issued a 48-hour ultimatum. Iran has vowed not to capitulate, and the deadline set by Trump would have expired on March 23.

Four Iranian officials said that the messages transmitted over the past few days through intermediaries and in direct conversations with the Americans were, in fact, attempts to figure out how to de-escalate the conflict in order to prevent its further escalation. Officials claim that Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi told Witkoff that Iran was not interested in a temporary cease-fire and wanted to conclude a sustainable peace agreement with guarantees that the United States and Israel would no longer attack it. The officials also said that the Iranians had been pushing Washington to ease economic sanctions, a topic that U.S. officials had discussed in talks before the war.

Pause and against: Trump is trying to split the Iranian elite

Washington has announced constructive talks with Tehran, although the Islamic Republic denies them.

CNN: Why Trump can't back down from Iran anymore

After several days of contradictory rhetoric, Trump made it clear about the first potential de-escalation of the conflict, referring to the 15 points of the agreement reached, according to him, during productive negotiations with Iran. Tehran said there had been no dialogue. The most encouraging view of recent events is that both the United States and Iran have reached a point where the cost of moving up the escalation ladder will become so terrifying that both sides need a way out. Such insights can be the first step towards ending wars.

The option of retreating and declaring victory, regardless of whether it is genuine or not, looks attractive. But abandoning the war would leave U.S. allies in the Persian Gulf who opposed it defenseless against an angry and empowered Iran. Ending the war without securing Iran's highly enriched uranium reserves could allow the country to develop nuclear weapons one day and undermine Trump's most consistent rationale for war.