The 15-point framework plan for peace with Iran that US President Donald Trump has said is being discussed is based on a proposal put forward by his negotiating team during nuclear talks almost a year ago, diplomats with knowledge of the talks say.
That original 15-point plan was the basis for negotiations in late May last year, shortly before the talks collapsed due to Israeli airstrikes on Iran’s nuclear program.
There has been much speculation about what Trump’s latest claimed plan contains and how much of it has been updated from the now-outdated document the US presented to the Iranians last year.
Illustration: Mountain People
The fact that the plan mightlargely be a rehash of something that Iran did not accept a year ago suggests either a lack of US seriousness about the talks being planned for this week — or, more likely, a desire by Trump, for whatever reason, to pretend on Monday he had made more progress toward a deal than he had in reality.
The Iranians accused Trump on Monday of trying to calm the US markets before they opened by saying he was not going ahead with his threatened attack on Iran’s energy infrastructure. He said he was postponing the strikes for five days to give time to see if “15 points of agreement” could be reached.
Trump said “very good and productive” conversations had led to progress over the previous two days. Iran denied there had been any backchannel talks except for indirect discussions about reviving talks.
Some of the US’ 15 points drafted last year might be regarded as out of date since there have been three further rounds of talks this year, while Iran’s nuclear program — especially its key uranium enrichment sites — has been obliterated by US bombing.
Some diplomats close to the talks said they did not believe a radically different new US document existed, and even if the US was working on such a plan, it has not yet been shown to the Iranians, let alone secured their agreement.
Last year’s 15-point plan, described by the US as a term sheet, was put forward unilaterally by the US side and contained a large number of proposals that Iran would find difficult to accept, including restrictions on Iran’s use of money released by sanctions. The plan promised to end only nuclear-related sanctions, as opposed to all sanctions, including human rights sanctions.
The US proposed that money released from lifted sanctions could not be used to fund Iran’s ballistic missile program. The plan also proposed that all uranium stockpiles be shipped out of Iran immediately and down-blended to 3.67 percent.
All enrichment facilities would be made unusable within a month, and centrifuges would be rendered inoperable. The US would help fund a new Iranian civilian nuclear program, with a fuel farm outside Iran and subject to inspection by the UN watchdog.
A regional enrichment consortium would be established involving Iran, the US, the United Arab Emirates, Qatar and Saudi Arabia. The consortium could have an outside manager.
Iran, in any new talks probably overseen by Pakistan and held in Islamabad, would likely seek to focus discussions on some kind of hard-to-deliver commitment that the US would not launch further military attacks on Iran.
The issue of freedom of navigation along the Strait of Hormuz would have to be addressed by Iran. Gulf states will be looking for some kind of guarantees from Iran through a non-aggression pact.
As a result, any deal is likely to be even harder to strike than in previous US-Iran talks, since the number of issues has expanded well beyond Iran’s nuclear program — the chief focus of the 15-point plan. Pakistani Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif on Tuesday confirmed the country’s offer to host talks, and there were hopes that US Vice President JD Vance would attend — a presence that would go some way to assuage Iran, since he is seen as a skeptic about the war.
The splits between the US and the rest of the G7 industrialized nations over the wisdom of launching the attack on Iran would be laid bare this week at a meeting of G7 foreign ministers in Paris.
Due to be attended by the US Secretary of State, Marco Rubio, the Iran war is scheduled to be discussed today at lunchtime — but France, Germany, Italy, the UK, Canada and Japan have all said they do not support what they regard as an unlawful and unnecessary war.
The six countries say they are acting to help defend Gulf allies, protect national interests in the region and promote freedom of navigation in the Strait of Hormuz — but that any intervention could only occur after a ceasefire.
China’s supreme objective in a war across the Taiwan Strait is to incorporate Taiwan as a province of the People’s Republic. It follows, therefore, that international recognition of Taiwan’s de jure independence is a consummation that China’s leaders devoutly wish to avoid. By the same token, an American strategy to deny China that objective would complicate Beijing’s calculus and deter large-scale hostilities. For decades, China has cautioned “independence means war.” The opposite is also true: “war means independence.” A comprehensive strategy of denial would guarantee an outcome of de jure independence for Taiwan in the event of Chinese invasion or
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文) earlier this month said it is necessary for her to meet with Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) and it would be a “huge boost” to the party’s local election results in November, but many KMT members have expressed different opinions, indicating a struggle between different groups in the party. Since Cheng was elected as party chairwoman in October last year, she has repeatedly expressed support for increased exchanges with China, saying that it would bring peace and prosperity to Taiwan, and that a meeting with Xi in Beijing takes priority over meeting
Taiwan no longer wants to merely manufacture the chips that power artificial intelligence (AI). It aims to build the software, platforms and services that run on them. Ten major AI infrastructure projects, a national cloud computing center in Tainan, the sovereign language model Trustworthy AI Dialogue Engine, five targeted industry verticals — from precision medicine to smart agriculture — and the goal of ranking among the world’s top five in computing power by 2040: The roadmap from “Silicon Island” to “Smart Island” is drawn. The question is whether the western plains, where population, industry and farmland are concentrated, have the water and
The political order of former president Lee Teng-hui (李登輝) first took shape in 1988. Then-vice president Lee succeeded former president Chiang Ching-kuo (蔣經國) after he passed, and served out the remainder of his term in office. In 1990, Lee was elected president by the National Assembly, and in 1996, he won Taiwan’s first direct presidential election. Those two, six and four-year terms were an era-defining 12-year presidential tenure. Throughout those years, Lee served as helmsman for Taiwan’s transition from martial law and authoritarianism to democracy. This period came to be known as the “quiet revolution,” leaving a legacy containing light
RSS