Is this serious or just an opening gambit?
I can’t see the US agreeing to most of this. As far as I can see, it amounts to “give us everything we want, admit you were wrong, and go away.”. (Admittedly rather of an oversimplification).
But what do people think?
Note to mods: if you think this would be better merged into an existing thread, go ahead.
Partly it’s an opening for negotiations showing the most extreme bargaining position - sort of like a union negotiation where the union is demanding a 100% pay raise and the employer is offering more work hours and cuts to benefits.
Partly I think it was a strategy by Iran because they suspected Trump would announce that a “deal” had been struck that made him the winner - when in fact there had been no negotiations and no deal. This is a Trump business tactic to throw your opponent off when bargaining. Announce a deal that is favorable to you, and then let your opponent fumble around and deny it.
This, basically, I wonder if it’s related to middle-east bargaining culture?
Related or not it’s often a good tactic to start with great demands and then allow yourself to be convinced of lowering them.
If so it was very smart on their part.
No chance that they’re just mocking Trump’s equally extreme and ridiculous demands?
An interesting thought. We have a clash of two very different cultures here.
On the other hand, in any negotiation it seems risky to start at the very hard end of the spectrum?
Time will tell…
It’s a signal of strength - they believe that Trump is more desperate for a deal than they are.
No joke here, but I have thought Trump’s rhetoric was reminiscent of the bombastic language sometimes used by leaders in the Middle East. When I hear Trump say something “has never been seen before” or “some are saying it’s the best ever” I can’t help but think of Saddam’s “mother of all wars.”
I know that Iran is f’d up. But it’s nice to finally see some backbone and have a country say F U.
I’m also glad NATO didn’t cave.
They where in the middle of negotiations, and he attacked.
We are used to dictatorships and their ridiculous claims of superiority. Running dogs of imperialism, we will crush you, line of death, great satan. Wheat production is up 150%. Our dear leader personally defeated the Japanese.
The Iranian theocracy seems to be a big fan of the “Big Lie”. Oh and they recently killed thousands of their own people.
But what we aren’t used to is our own dear leader making the same ridiculous claims. There is long list of Trumpisms in this regard.
So, is the Iranian Theocratic dictatorship getting their asses kicked tactically? Yes they are. Will they lose Strategically? That’s seriously up to debate.
IMO, this stupid Trump War is not going as well as he thought it would. He wants to get out of it as soon as possible and the Iranian Theocracy knows this.
Will they get all their demands? Probably not. But they are going to win for “defeating” the great satan. All they need to do is survive to do this.
https://thehill.com/policy/international/5823074-trump-iran-10-point-plan-what-to-know/
recognizing Iranian control over the Strait of Hormuz,
Is a no-go.
Is it true that the details of the 10 point plan have not yet been published? I seem to be having trouble finding any such detail.
In any case, and although I don’t want Iran to win anything they didn’t have before the war, I hope they continue to stand firm and defiant, and prevent Trump from proclaiming victory.
I’m not sure how much detail has been published, or how or correct it is. But here is one link I saw:
https://www.nytimes.com/2026/04/08/world/middleeast/iran-10-point-proposal-trump-us-ceasefire.html
Trump is a known lair who casually goes back on deals and attacked them during negotiations. There is demonstrably no point in approaching any “negotiations” with the US from the standpoint of trying to make an actual deal. So they are approaching the matter from a diplomatic and political standpoint. Strong demands make them look good both domestically and internationally.
Whether the US would ever accept them is beside the point, since the US would never seriously come to an agreement under any circumstances anyway so long as Trump is in power.
I found this on gulfnews.com, from 2 days ago:
According to Iranian officials and state media, the key elements include:
A guarantee that Iran will not be attacked again
A permanent end to the war, not just a ceasefire
An end to Israeli strikes in Lebanon and against Iranian allies
The lifting of all US sanctions on Iran
Iran agreeing to reopen the Strait of Hormuz
Introduction of a $2 million fee per ship transiting Hormuz
Revenue from shipping fees to be shared with Oman
Funds to be used for reconstruction of war-damaged infrastructure
Establishment of safe passage protocols through Hormuz
A broader framework to end regional hostilities
And this from thenationalnews.com (whatever that is):
Strait of Hormuz to be reopened “under the co-ordination of the armed forces of Iran”
Establishment of a “secure transit protocol” in the Strait of Hormuz
The war against “all components” of Iran’s so-called Axis of Resistance to end
US forces to withdraw from “all bases and points of deployment within the region”
Full payment of compensation to Iran
Lifting of all primary sanctions
Lifting of all secondary sanctions
Termination of all UN Security Council resolutions
Termination of all IAEA resolutions on Iran’s nuclear programme
Release of all frozen Iranian assets and properties abroad
These are similar but different in detail.
Trump has made negotiating with the U.S. into a somewhat futile exercise, not matter what deal you reach it will be trashed whenever he feels like it.
It’s like dealing with a savage animal, you can “negotiate” an arrangement with a wolf, you may try to reach a modus vivendi by making sure the wolf regrets it every time it messes with you, and thus develops some sort of association in his mind between “messing with you” and pain.
Even then you cannot be sure that Trump the wolf has been completely trained out of attacking you, it’s not a domestic animal so you have to keep your guard up.
Meh, an easy fix with a Sharpie:
“Iran has control over the Strait of Hormuz, with a million dollar kickback per ship payable directly to Donald Trump.”
No kidding. The US and Canada are in the middle of negotiation a new trade agreement (USMCA), which makes me a bit worried that in the middle of negotiations, Trump might just send a dozen tomahawk missiles to blow up the Canadian negotiators in Ottawa.
…it is serious.
And to understand why its serious, you need to look at the wider context.
This isn’t just about Iran and the US. It’s about Israel and Lebanon and the entire region.
And what we have seen over the last three years is that the word “ceasefire” is utterly meaningless. There is a “ceasefire” in Gaza right now, but that hasn’t ended the ongoing siege, that hasn’t stopped the daily killing of Palestinians with over 730 killed since the “ceasefire” was announced. And during the Lebanon "ceasefire:
“UNIFIL has recorded more than 7,500 air violations and nearly 2,500 ground violations north of the Blue Line, reflecting “total disregard of the ceasefire agreement.””
So the first two bullet points in the agreement, “a guarantee that Iran will not be attacked again” and “a permanent end to the war, not just a ceasefire”, directly address this.
In the past, Israel has uses “ceasefires” as tactical pauses to rearm and regroup before relaunching hostilities (if they actually stopped hostilities, which isn’t the case for both Gaza and Lebanon) . Ceasefires have been weaponised. In the new age of “international diplomacy” that disregards the basic tenets of international law that both America and Israel are ushering in, ceasefires have no meaning. They are performative and provide cover for continued military operations for just one side. So that’s why there is a demand for a permanent end to the war.
The second point is the “end to Israeli strikes in Lebanon and against Iranian allies.” Again: this is critical, and we simply aren’t talking enough about what Israel is doing in Lebanon and what the probable endgame is. Yesterday Isreal launched a series of brutal attacks that killed hundreds of people. Today the Director-General of the World Health Organization said this:
" The Israeli Defense Forces have issued an evacuation order for Beirut’s Jnah area, which includes two major referral hospitals; the Rafik Hariri University Hospital and Al Zahraa Hospital. At this time, no alternative medical facilities are available to receive approximately 450 patients from the two hospitals (including 40 patients in the ICU), rendering their evacuation operationally unfeasible. Both facilities are operating at full capacity, including treating the injured from the strikes of 8 April. This zone also encompasses the [Ministry of Public Health] complex, and hosts five shelters accommodating more than 5000 people."
Israel has been targeting journalists, hospitals, ambulances and paramedics in Lebanon. In the recent past, Israel sabotaged the supply chain and turned hundreds of cellphones into explosive devices. They use manually placed explosives and bulldozers to destroy entire villages.
This isn’t what a “defensive war” looks like. This looks like an attempted ethnic cleansing, annexation and occupation, with Southern Lebanon being the first target.
This is the Gaza playbook. This is exactly how it played out in Gaza. Isreal got away with it. So why stop there?
So Iran’s position here is a relatively simple one: Isreal should stop doing that.
A reminder: this war started with the targeted assassination of practically the entirety of the Iranian leadership. Imagine taking out the House of Lords. Or half of the US Senate. Imagine killing the Pope. And it happened during negotiations. It was a “Pearl Harbour.”
And the America/Israel coalition keeps killing leaders/negotiators. So it really isn’t a matter of “give us everything we want, admit you were wrong, and go away.” It’s a matter of "we can’t trust you not to reneg on the deal and kill me tomorrow. "
I suspect most everything else in the proposal can be negotiated. But the permanent end to the war and an end to strikes on Lebanon and their allies are absolutely serious due to all of the things I’ve outlined above.
They are ordering the lame to walk. Are they also ordering the blind to see?
I think they realize that America withdrawing from the middle east is not going to happen and I think they probably want one of reparations or control of the strait. Everything else I think they’re serious about.
The Us and Israel have no credibility to threaten them with anything. They’ve demonstrated such a lack of consistency, coordination and even the pretense of strategic alignment that until they get serious Iran is not going to take them seriously.
Not to mention the current status quo is that Iran does control the strait and doesn’t have any international nuclear inspectors so there really is no pressure on them to lower their ambitions at the moment.