Prof. John Mearsheimer: Trump Says Iran Deal Is 95% Complete – Israel & War Hawks Furious

Hinzugefügt: 2026-05-31

[00:00:00]First thing that people want to understand is that the question of whether or not you deal with the nuclear issue upfront or you set a basic framework in place and put an end to the war and open the straight first and then later turn to the nuclear issue is of central importance here. And the Americans have a deep-seated interest in dealing with the nuclear issue first because once they get the nuclear issue off the table to their satisfaction, this is to the Americans' satisfaction, then they can play hardball with the Iranians on the other issue.

[00:00:40]Issues, excuse me. But the Iranians have the exact opposite incentive, which is to get a peace in place or a meaningful ceasefire in place and get some other benefits upfront and then turn to the nuclear issue later because the Americans will then have lost some of their leverage. So, the two sides are going back and forth on when exactly to deal with the nuclear issue. And when the reports first started coming out uh about 12 hours ago as to where this was headed, it looked like the Iranians were going to get their way. That the war was going to end, the shooting was going to end, the straight was going to be open, the two blockades were going to be brought to a conclusion, to be more specific. Uh Iran was going to get its frozen assets back and there was also going to be sanctions relief on Iran so that it could sell its oil in global markets.

[00:01:46]But the nuclear issue and the future of the straight was put off to the second round of negotiations.

[00:01:54]And at that point, everybody, including the Americans, appeared to be quite optimistic about settling the conflict.

[00:02:02]What's happened now, and this is quite clear when you listen to President Trump speak at the moment, is that the Americans want the nuclear issue to be dealt with in good part now.

[00:02:14]And this is obviously the result of pressure from hawks in the United States and from Israel because the Israelis and the hawks want the nuclear issue first. Well, well, John, on that note, Haaretz, the prominent Israeli newspaper, reports that Trump will only sign the Iran deal if it eliminates the nuclear program. And it goes on to say that Israeli officials believe Tehran's leaders are misleading the US negotiating team on this very issue.

[00:02:44]Well, initially, it looked like the Trump administration had conceded the Iranian demand that the nuclear issue be put in the second set of negotiations.

[00:02:57]And what you're just reporting, Tom, from Haaretz, moves the nuclear issue up. Now, let's assume that Trump sticks to his guns.

[00:03:05]If he does that, almost all of the issues have to be dealt with in the first round of negotiations. Once you move the nuclear issue up, for example, the whole question of the future of the Strait of Hormuz, whether Iran and Oman are going to control that together in the future, was initially left to the second round. 12 hours ago, it was going to be a second-round issue along with the nuclear issue. But if you move the nuclear issue up front because of its importance to all of the parties in this agreement, everything else has to be brought into play. And once you do that, Tom, you're dealing with a lot of moving parts.

[00:03:50]Well, on the Strait of Hormuz, the Secretary of State, Marco Rubio, who's been in India in the last few days, he's made it very clear that there'll be no case for tolls, that Iran will not be able to impose toll levies on traffic.

[00:04:04]That could be a game-changer, couldn't it? Yes, it could be. And there two other big game-changers in there. One is the nuclear issue. Yes. Uh and just to be clear, uh for the sake of the audience, there are two issues at play when you talk about the nuclear issue. One issue is the question what you do with those 440-plus kilograms of highly [clears throat] enriched uranium.

[00:04:30]The Americans and the Israelis want that highly enriched uranium removed from Iran. And the Iranians don't want to do that. The Iranians are willing to weaken it so that it's no longer highly enriched, but they don't want it moved out of the country. The second big issue is how much nuclear enrichment capability is Iran allowed to keep in place. The Americans and the Israelis would like to see all that nuclear enrichment capability in Iran wrecked. The Iranians, of course, say they have a right to keep that capability and don't want to see it wrecked.

[00:05:12]Um what distinguishes that from, say, the Obama nuclear deal that was negotiated in 2015 and which, of course, Donald Trump scrapped 3 years later?

[00:05:22]Well, the fact is that the enriched uranium at the time was removed from Iran and it was sent to Russia. Russia, yeah. However, the Iranians were allowed were allowed to keep their enrichment installations intact. They could not enrich uranium to a high level.

[00:05:45]That was very important for the United States and to a lesser extent for the Israelis, but they could still enrich and the enrichment infrastructure was kept in place. Now we're talking about eliminating that uh uh that uh enrichment infrastructure altogether and the Iranians refuse to do that. So that's another you know, significant point of contention. So you Tom brought up the issue of the Strait of Hormuz What Marco or Rubio's point is Mhm. Mhm. I'm saying to you you have a similar problem with regard to the nuclear issue, with regard to getting the material out of the country and with regard to the enrichment facilities themselves. And then the third big issue, and it is a really important issue, is Lebanon because Iran says they want a ceasefire and then a peace agreement that means no more war in uh Lebanon forever, which means the Israelis can't go after Hezbollah. And it doesn't take uh uh genius to realize that the Israelis are not going to be happy about that. How do you square these circles?

[00:06:53]The nuclear issue, the Strait of Hormuz and Lebanon. Big issues, but if broadly these reports are correct, John, that we have a regional ceasefire, there's sanctions relief and there is eventual negotiations over the nuclear issue and the Strait of Hormuz.

[00:07:09]I mean, is all this a tacit acknowledgement by Trump that the costs of escalation had become unsustainable, that in effect that there was no viable military solution here?

[00:07:23]Yes, Tom. That's absolutely correct. We could go into why there is no military solution if you would like, but before we get there, I would just point out that we really, we meaning the United States, we really have three options here. Uh number one is a military attack, >> [clears throat] >> uh renewing the bombing campaign in effect. And that's just not a viable option, as you were pointing out. The second thing that we can do is we can cut a deal along the lines that we were just talking about. Where we were 12 hours ago.

[00:07:55]Uh and that will probably work. But the problem is we would be conceding defeat to Iran.

[00:08:02]Lots of people understand that. That deal that people are talking about 12 hours ago is a deal that says in effect Iran won.

[00:08:12]That's option two.

[00:08:14]Option A is just to maintain the status quo. Just to continue along uh the path that we are now moving down. And this means that we rely on the blockade instead of a bombing campaign against Iran. And the problem, Tom, there is that the international economy is increasingly uh feeling the pain.

[00:08:40]And lots of people are now beginning to say, and when I say lots of people, I'm talking about people who uh operate in the business world, economists, uh oil experts, and so forth are saying, and so forth and so on, are saying that if this problem is not solved by the end of July and we move into August with the strait closed, uh [clears throat] the consequences are likely to be catastrophic. So, all of that is to say even if you don't get an agreement now and you keep going on the path that we're now on with the blockade uh it's going to have devastating consequences by late summer. This is why there's pressure on Trump now to shut this one down. You know, you want to ask yourself this question, Tom. Why are we having this conversation uh tonight? What is it uh right here in Chicago and uh in the morning in uh Australia. Why are we having this conversation? It's in large part because Trump feels compelled to try to shut it down right away because he knows that we are heading toward the precipice economically. This is a very key point, John. So, a lot of this comes down to not just military realities as I alluded to in my earlier question, uh to economic realities. So, let's be clear.

[00:09:59]You've got the oil prices, um the shipping disruptions, inflationary pressures, the debt markets. You've mentioned before on this program the fear of stagflation in the West. We have high inflation, high unemployment, the likes of which we haven't really seen since the 1970s. In other words, you could make the argument that it's markets now constraining American power in ways that the Washington elite still struggle to acknowledge. John.

[00:10:25]I think there's no question that you're right. I think you identified all the major problems.

[00:10:30]>> Yep. Uh and many people point to inflation as the key here. Mhm. Because as inflation rises, and it's almost guaranteed to rise even more than it already has, uh it's going to cause uh Fed to increase interest rates, and that's going to slow down growth, and this is what leads to stagflation.

[00:10:51]Uh and furthermore, as inflation begins to soar, uh the bond yields go up. It becomes more difficult to service the debt and so forth and so on. So, there just all sorts of huge economic problems sitting out there that Donald Trump wants to head off at the pass, especially when you take into account that the midterm elections are coming up in November.

[00:11:13]And uh if we go off the precipice before then, and the Senate is dominated by Democrats and the House is dominated by Democrats, he may get impeached and this time convicted as well. So, the stakes for him were enormous. So, if he doesn't do the military option, which seems implausible as we've discussed.

[00:11:33]And he does this deal where he more or less capitulates to Tehran's demands if you like or keeps the status quo.

[00:11:41]Um the reality is John it seems to the layperson that the regime the Islamic Republic will still stay in place.

[00:11:49]Um the nuclear program's probably going to stay in place.

[00:11:53]Um the ballistic missiles will stay in place.

[00:11:56]The regional proxies, you know, Hamas, Hezbollah, the Houthi rebels will still stay in place and unlike pre-February 28th Iran has more leverage with respect to the Strait of Hormuz and all of that traffic that that accounts for 20% of global oil um and um and gas and fertilizers.

[00:12:17]How would Trump sell any kind of deal as a victory when the likes of his own party of I think of Republican Senator Lindsey Graham the former US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo whom you debated in Toronto just last week.

[00:12:32]I mean that would be outraged if Trump does any kind of deal along the lines we've really discussed John. I think there's no question about it. He's going to be clobbered by the Israel Lobby, by Israel itself and by warhawks like uh Lindsey Graham and others. There's just no doubt about it. Mike Pompeo included as you said. Uh >> [clears throat] >> but this is Trump's problem. He's between a rock and a hard place. I mean what is he going to do? Take the international economy off a cliff? Yeah.

[00:13:00]Uh does he really want to do that? And the answer of course is no. And that's why he's scrambling like crazy to try and come up with a solution. But there is no solution. And by the way Tom just to say a word or two about military option and relate that to our discussion of the economic dimension. It's very important the viewers understand if we actually go back to the bombing campaign that will speed up uh our movement toward the precipice, right?

[00:13:32]Because if we start the bombing campaign again, the Iranians have made it clear that not only going to are they going to keep the Persian Gulf shut, they're going to shut down the Red Sea as well. Through the Strait of Hormuz, yeah. Yeah, and that will be disastrous. And furthermore, they're also talking about tearing up the cables, the under undersea cables that run through the Persian Gulf. And this will have disastrous economic consequences.

[00:14:03]>> Yeah. But we should always acknowledge the the counter argument put forward by the critics. And they would say that together with the naval blockade, escalation, military escalation would really put more pressure on the mullahs.

[00:14:17]Their economy is in dire straits, John.

[00:14:19]How would you respond to that argument?

[00:14:21]I don't see what the target sets are in an air campaign. The new target sets in an air campaign that act as a big force multiplier to [clears throat] the blockade. But let's assume I'm wrong, Tom, and let's assume that as a result of the bombing campaign coupled with the blockade, we really up the pressure or the punishment campaign against Iran.

[00:14:44]The question you have to ask yourself is what are the Iranians going to do? Do you think they're going to throw up their hands? And the answer is no.

[00:14:51]They're not going to throw up their hands. They are facing an existential threat. They are facing two countries that have genocidal intentions towards them. All you have to do is listen to President Trump talk about bombing Iran back to the Stone Age. And talk >> Did did it the other day, yeah. Yeah, and so they're not going to give up.

[00:15:12]They're going to fight to the death. But the other thing, Tom, you do not want to lose sight of is the Iranians think they're playing the strong hand here.

[00:15:20]Right. So they have an incentive to move slowly as its leverage grows with time.

[00:15:25]That's your line. Yes, it is. And I think if you listen to them talk, that's exactly how they talk, right?

[00:15:32]President Trump, by the way, this morning, here, Chicago time, um 12 hours ago, he was talking about wrapping this one up quickly. He's now talking about going slowly because pressure's been brought to bear on him.

[00:15:47]And he is saying, President Trump is saying explicitly that time is on our side, on America's side. But, I believe he's dead wrong. Time is not on our side. Time is on Iran's side. And if you're playing Iran's side, what you want to do is string this out for a bit longer and bring more pressure to bear on Trump to cut a deal.