Outcome of the reaction: The United States is waiting for Iran's response to the proposal to end the war

The US and Iran are nearing a "historic deal." Washington is waiting for a response from Tehran on a very specific proposal to end the conflict. But the authorities of the Islamic Republic are not in a hurry yet, calling the American initiatives "far from reality." The search for compromises is also complicated by Israel's attacks on Lebanon, which resumed after the truce in early April. Despite this, the parties still have a chance to reach interim agreements, experts interviewed by Izvestia believe.

How do Iran and the United States assess the future agreement

There is a prospect of a settlement in the conflict between the United States and Iran. At least, the American press is full of rather optimistic insiders. CNN claims that on May 7, Tehran should send its response to the mediators on Washington's proposal to end the war.

We can talk about signing a symbolic one-page memorandum that will pave the way for 30-day direct talks between Washington and Tehran. During this time, the parties will have to conclude additional agreements on the most pressing issues: the status of the Strait of Hormuz and the future of Iran's nuclear program, the Axios portal clarifies, which is already the traditional primary source of high-profile leaks. In addition, the parties plan to agree on a phased lifting of US sanctions.

The White House seems to be positive and expects Iran to sign the memorandum by the end of the week. "Everything is going well for us now, and we have to get what we have to get. If we don't do this, we will have to take a big step further. But at the same time, they want to make a deal," commented US President Donald Trump.

According to the Republican, the proposed option should not cause Iranians to reject it, since it "takes into account their interests as well." In particular, it echoes some of the pre-election promises of the President of the Republic, Masoud Peseshkian, about the reintegration of Iran into the global economy.

At the same time, Tehran is mostly skeptical about leaks to the Western press. In particular, the representative of the Committee on National Security and Foreign Policy of the Parliament of the Islamic Republic, Ebrahim Rezai, criticized the Axios publications, calling them "fantasies" of the American side. "The Axios text [about the prepared memorandum] is more of an American wish list than a reality. As a result of the war they are losing, they will not receive anything that they did not receive in the negotiations," he wrote on the social network.

The speaker of the country's parliament and head of the Iranian negotiating group, Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, went even further, saying that Trump's plans to deblock the Strait of Hormuz by force had failed, and therefore he was forced to return to "Operation Fauxios" (faux in English — fake, artificial), that is, to confuse and deceive negotiating partners.

Israel's strikes on Lebanon delay a deal

The search for an American-Iranian compromise has recently become seriously complicated due to the unfreezing of the Lebanese Front. On the evening of May 6, for the first time in a month, that is, in fact, since the announcement of the truce between the United States and Iran, Israel launched a combined strike on Beirut, citing "considerations of preventive defense." At least three people were killed and ten others were injured in the attack.

Subsequently, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu instructed the army to be prepared for any scenario, including the resumption of hostilities against Iran and the Lebanese-based Hezbollah. The pro-Iranian Shiite movement attempted to carry out a retaliatory operation in the south by attacking a group of Israeli soldiers with a kamikaze UAV. As a result, seven soldiers were slightly injured.

Due to the general aggravation of the situation, the Israelis have noticeably intensified their behind-the-scenes dialogue with representatives of the US administration. Over the past few days, Netanyahu has held a series of telephone blitz talks with the Americans. The Israeli leadership was trying to get new information about the state of contacts with Iran and understand what conditions are currently being discussed, which partly reflects West Jerusalem's concern about possible US concessions on the Iranian issue.

"We are in constant contact with our friends in the United States. I talk to President Trump almost on a daily basis. My people and his people communicate daily," Netanyahu said.

Political analyst Advan Hisham warns in this regard that Israel may deliberately provoke a local escalation in order to weaken the rapprochement between the negotiating positions of Tehran and Washington and thereby ensure the promotion of its own regional interests.

— Netanyahu seeks to maintain a state of maximum tension in the Middle East for as long as possible. Thanks to the principle of "divide and rule," the prime minister can extinguish domestic political problems and at the same time advance on the external circuit, motivating controversial decisions with the "Iranian threat" or "proactive defense." Neutralizing the conflict between the United States and Iran will significantly reduce the effectiveness of this strategy, Hisham believes.

The current frequency of exchanges of strikes between Israel and the Lebanese Hezbollah allows the negotiating parties to virtually ignore rare violations, Alexei Yurk, a researcher at the Primakov IMEMO Center for Middle East Studies of the Russian Academy of Sciences, tells Izvestia.

"Of course, the situation may change if Israel decides, at its discretion, to seriously intensify hostilities on the northern front, but the probability of this is not so high yet," the expert concludes.

Interim arrangements are still possible

But despite the changing negotiating landscape, the United States and Iran are still able to come to an agreement. And some kind of "symbolic memorandum" may well be signed, especially if the wording used in it is as vague and vague as possible.

— This will help both Iran and the United States to save face and declare victory, while at the same time refuting the statements of the opposite side. Contradictory signals should be regarded more as a diplomatic game designed to create tension and then weaken it during the negotiations," Alexey Yurk believes.

In addition, it is worth considering the domestic political factor. Each side, against the background of war fatigue, seeks to demonstrate readiness for fair negotiations, while at the same time maintaining a tough position, the expert concluded.

The viability of this scenario is also hinted at in the Middle East. For example, the Saudi channel Al-Hadath reports that Iran and the United States, with the participation of regional mediators, have opened a separate negotiation track on the phased unblocking of the Strait of Hormuz. Sources close to the Saudi delegation report that the parties even managed to reach preliminary agreements on easing the American blockade in exchange for the gradual opening of "safe corridors" by Iran. Given that similar assessments are broadcast by major American media outlets, it can be assumed that preparations for symbolic agreements have indeed entered an active phase.

However, the maneuver of concluding "interim agreements" will only work at the tactical level. The parties will gain time to clarify positions and prepare proposals for the transition to a new negotiation phase, which is especially important, for example, on issues related to the future of the Iranian nuclear program. At the same time, the intermediaries overseeing the process will not be able to completely defuse tensions in the Middle East, including returning traffic figures through Hormuz to pre-war levels. But such a task, apparently, is not being set.