Opinions of Peter Belmont
Speaking Truth to Power
| How to End the USA Iran War |
|
by Peter A. Belmont / 2026-09-11
| |||||||
| Today, 2026/9/11, I want to give my view, my speculations, of what the USA (Trump) must do to end the USA-Iran war. Iran has suggested a set of requirements to end the war (the now abandoned MOU, see below), but as the war drags on, Iran may become more demanding (or, of course, less demanding). War and diplomacy and the interplay of international pressures—from Russia, Turkey, China, for example—might change the game. What Ending The War Means To Me And Why It Is Important To Do It Soon Ending the war means, to me, ending the closure of the Straight of Hormuz and the restoration of deliveries through the Straight of oil, LNG, helium, urea, and whatever other vital products have been removed from availability for the duration of Iran’s blockade of the Straight. Opening the Straight will not, of course, undo any of the harms which have already arisen and which will continue to arise even after the Straight is re-opened. Re-opening the Straight will merely allow vital products to enter the supply “pipeline”, and ships carrying these vital cargoes will still have to transit the oceans for many months [let us say T months for a particular destination] before arriving at their destinations. That is why re-opening the Straight soon is so important. Waiting [i.e., for W months] to end the war, for whatever reason (perhaps waiting until shortages are severe) before re-opening the Straight will have the consequence of adding many months ( W months ) to the delay due to transit times ( T months ) to the duration of the shortages. Assuming that there are no ships whatever carrying cargoes from the Straight toward a particular distant destination today (i.e., assuming that the “pipeline” to that destination is empty at present), the time before the shortages there are in any sense lifted is at least W+T. Ending the war can stop W from growing but cannot reduce it. The Questions About How And Why The War Started Are Not Important Now As an aside, I’d like to say that this essay is not an inquiry into why the USA began this war, or into the legality or morality or politics (or corruption or ideologies) that led to this war or which may characterize this war. To understand how to end the war, it is not necessary to look in any way at how or why the war began. Of course, Iran had never closed the Straight historically and did not do so until attacked by the USA and Israel in 2025. The question I mean to answer is: what can/should the USA do now, and when, in an effort to end this war. Iran Alone Will Determine When This War Ends Iran has stated, publicly, its requirements of the USA for ending the war. These requirements were stated in the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) which the USA said that it accepted and then immediately violated. I believe that it is amply demonstrated that no effort by the USA to “win” the war by continued military means, or by financial sanctions, will cause Iran to open the Straight. Why Trump continues to do both things is anybody’s guess. Since the outcome of such theatrics has been to delay the end of the war, it may be presumed that at least one reason for Trump’s behavior has been a desire to continue the war, to continue the closure of the Straight, to continue the shortages of oil, LNG, etc., (and perhaps most immediately important, shortages of diesel fuel which USA’s agricultural and transportation sectors depend upon). Prolonging the war allows Trump and his cronies to continue to manipulate energy markets and make obscene “investment” profits. For the USA to comply with the MOU (or with whatever other and further demands Iran may from time to time announce) will, among other things, amount to a total capitulation to Iran. The MOU of 17 June 2026 provides or requires, in part: [1] An end to all military operations by USA and its allies (i.e., Israel) in the Iran theater of war and elsewhere, with Lebanon named explicitly and Palestine possibly implicit. [3] The USA and Iran will negotiate a “final deal”. [4] The USA will end its naval blockade of Iran within 30 days (of the MOU) and remove its naval and other military presence in “proximity” to Iran within 30 days after the “final deal” is agreed to. [5] Iran will allow safe passage of shipping through the Straight of Hormuz without payment being required for 60 days (after the MOU). [6] The USA will pay Iran $300B. Presumably as war reparations. [7] The USA will end all sanctions against Iran. [8] Iran reaffirms that it will not develop or procure nuclear weapons. The parties will agree what to do about Iran’s stockpiles of refined uranium. [9] The parties will agree for modalities by which the USA will release all Iranian funds now frozen by the USA. [11] The USA will release to Iran’s use all presently frozen Iranian funds [14] The “final deal” will be endorsed by the UNSC. The problems with the MOU were: [a] Israel was not a signatory and did not agree to end its wars against Iran and in Lebanon and Gaza, has not done so, and shows no intention of doing so; and [b] The USA welshed on the agreement almost immediately. Trump seems almost incapable of keeping his word, whether w.r.t. the MOU with Iran or he agreement with Russia done in Anchorage. Perhaps he prides himself on a record of breaking his word. Perhaps his mind and emotions are such, and the political and other pressures upon him are such, that keeping his word is impossible for him. The USA’s Best Bet For Ending The War Since Iran, alone, can end the war (by opening the Straight) and has made clear that it will not do so until various demands are met, the USA should agree to comply with Iran’s demands and take actions, in a continuing fashion over time, that indicate or constitute such compliance. Of course, Iran may extend its list of demands at any time. And may make demands that the USA cannot comply with, such as requiring an end to Israel’s wars and other misbehavior in Lebanon and Palestine. Iran might decide to demand an end to Israel’s settlements in the West Bank, which the USA is in no position (directly) to comply with. But there is much that the USA can do and should do. [1] Pay the reparations demanded. Release all sequestered Iranian funds. End all sanctions on Iran. [2] Remove the USA’s naval presence anywhere near Iran. Remove the USA’s ground-based military presence anywhere near Iran. (Most of the latter has been destroyed already anyhow.) [3] Although the USA cannot compel Israel to comply with Iran’s demands (or UNSC’s demands, or USA’s demands, come to that), the USA can separate itself from Israel, to make the claim and to make clear that Israel and the USA are separate entities so that Israel’s continuing attacks on Iran, Lebanon, or Palestine should not, repeat, not be regarded (by Iran) as acts of the USA. So, the USA should declare a total suspension, of USA transfers of money or weapons to Israel, and of military co-operation until Israel complies with all Iranian demands which I imagine would include: ending its war with Iran; ending its war and other military operations in Lebanon; and ending its wars, pogroms, closure, occupation, and settlement program in Palestine, and releasing all Palestinian and Lebanese prisoners. By the way, the legislation sponsored by AIPAC that would fuse the USA and Israeli militaries—legislation which has passed the House—would tend to make the USA completely responsible in all eyes, including Iran’s, for all military actions taken by Israel including attacks on Iran and attacks on Lebanon or Gaza or West Bank. This would not helpful in the event that the USA wished to make peace with Iran. Would taking these steps end the war? Who knows? Ending the war is in Iran’s sole discretion. Can there be an end of the war without most of this being begun and continuing? Hard to imagine. What I have not mentioned so far is that—I believe—Iran will not regard the war “ended” until Israel is substantially disarmed, although Israel ending its “Greater Israel Project” by leaving Lebanon, ending all violence against Gaza and the West Bank and removing its settlers from Syria’s Golan Heights and Palestine’s West Bank might be a satisfactory substitute. |
Comments:
Submit a comment, subject to review:
|
123pab.com | Top
©2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020, 2021, 2022, 2023, 2024 www.123pab.com |