The ongoing situation in the Middle East remains a quagmire, according to Middle East analysts, with the United States and Iran currently engaged in a temporary ceasefire while Israel bombarded Lebanon on Wednesday.
U.S. President Donald Trump issued remarks Tuesday via social media, threatening to destroy “a whole civilization…never to be brought back again” due to the ongoing closure of the Strait of Hormuz that has had negative ramifications on the global economy, notably spiked oil costs.
The comments led to a two-week ceasefire that was immediately at peril on Wednesday, when Israeli Defense Forces struck reportedly 100 different targets in Beirut within a 10-minute stretch—killing a minimum of 182 people, according to Lebanon, and wounding hundreds of others. The ceasefire for now is holding following what has been described as the deadliest day in the current Israel-Hezbollah war.
Regional experts said Wednesday that many factors will play into all involved parties getting what they want. The negotiations at hand between the U.S. and Iran are tenuous at best, with Iran issuing the U.S. a 10-point peace plan they deem necessary to end the ongoing war.
Details of the 10-Point Plan and US Response
That plan, released in Farsi by Iranian state media and reportedly submitted to the White House via Pakistani intermediaries, includes conditions previously shunned by U.S. officials.
It includes, according to the New York Times, a U.S. guarantee to prevent future aggression against Iran, recognition that Iran controls the Strait of Hormuz, ending hostilities throughout the region, and withdrawing militarily from the Middle East and providing reparations to Iran.
Jim Hanson, chief strategist for the Middle East Forum formerly of U.S. Army Special Forces, called it “an interim step to a better situation.”
“The 10-point deal is mostly Iranian posturing,” Hanson said. “There are things in there that everyone knows are non-starters. There'll be no uranium enrichment. I do fear that there is a deal underway for some sort of joint package. President Trump said that they may join with Iran in charging ships to transit the strait. That's a suboptimal outcome in any way, shape or form.”
Hanson, echoing Trump and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth’s statements acknowledging the completion of military objectives in Iran, said the situation requires “a more strategic outcome” including no ongoing nuclear program, a neutral party or the U.S. controlling the enriched uranium, and ensuring free transit not just in the strait but through all other maritime U.S. shipping lanes the U.S. Navy has guaranteed for decades.
Some of that has been reported as the United States' response to Iran, within its own 15-point plan that Iran commits to never developing nuclear weapons, handing over its stockpile of enriched uranium to the International Atomic Energy Agency, reopening the Strait of Hormuz, and ending Iranian proxy support for Hezbollah in Lebanon, and Houthis in Yemen.
“We've been the only ones doing that,” Hanson said. “If we are no longer the guarantor of that, there's a problem for everyone. And so, I don't think that's an outcome that's acceptable.”
Mehrdad Marty Youssefiani, director of the Iran Freedom Project and an American of Kurdish-Iranian heritage, said Wednesday that his priority falls on the Iranian population which he described as a majority of the 92 million or so citizens who want Iranian regime change.
“If the choice was at one point regime continuation versus regime end, albeit through kinetic action, I think most Iranians chose the latter,” Youssefiani said. “But as this takes longer and longer and as the regime demonstrates its resilience, it's akin to a championship aging boxer who may survive 15 rounds but will succumb to those [blows].”
Michael Rubin, senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, said that Iran is quite wounded but still is projecting power in different ways. One example, according to Rubin, is the United States’ apparent underestimation of the numbers and ranges of Iran's ballistic missiles.
“The fact is, according to the Congressional Research Service, according to Secretary of State Marco Rubio, the Iranians have the capability to produce between 50 and 100 missiles per month,” Rubin said. “We're in a situation in which the Iranians are going to rebuild that capability.
“At the same time, we still have the issue of Iran's proxies. Sometimes it seems that our diplomatic celebrations of ceasefires and peace agreements are akin to having a ribbon cutting for a skyscraper where we've only built the foundation. And I say that noting that Hamas is yet to disarm.”
Ceasefire Effect on Israeli Operation
The ceasefire has also shone a larger spotlight on Israel, as it pelted Lebanon on Wednesday while Iranian officials claimed the agreed-upon ceasefire was being violated.
Alex Selsky is director of Israel Affairs and serves on the board of directors of Middle East Forum-Israel. He also currently serves as a reserve major in the IDF Homefront Command emergency information unit.
He said “nothing has changed so far” as part of the military operation, adding that the current moment for the majority of Israelis conjures “a very bad feeling.”
“I think that the Israeli society on one hand is very disappointed because we want to see that this fight was not in vain and that this is not another round that will lead us to nothing—and that the Iranian regime will be only stronger after that,” Selsky said on Wednesday.
He added: “On the other hand, many people want their lives back, want children to go to school, want to go to work, and want to go out without being forced to search for shelter. I do think that the first thing of wanting victory and wanting this not to be another round, but to be a war that will end this threat is much stronger. I think that society will be able and capable to pay the price of another…in order to know that the threat will be eliminated.”
'Larger Mess' With Unknowns
The U.S. operation in Iran could become more complicated rather than the opposite in the days and weeks ahead, according to Hanson, who described the strikes in Lebanon as indicative of “a larger mess” but not one that could prevail if broader negotiations succeed.
Rubin cautioned that in the hypothetical likelihood that Iran is sincere about peace, it’s important to understand that, historically, the time of greatest danger is when peace looms because spoilers within the system will try to undermine that.
He conjured the Oslo Accords, when more people died in the three or six months afterward than in the three or six months before them.
“The same thing was true with regard to the Irish Republican Army in Northern Ireland, where you had the advent of the real IRA,” Rubin added, ostensibly warning of similar reaction in Iran should any negotiations succeed.
Youssefiani added that the Iranian regime “no longer holds the same characteristic that it had,” mentioning “deep fissures” that exist in terms of public blowback, an upside-down banking system, an economy in “shambles,” and countless destroyed infrastructure. There has also been a widespread, months-long media blackout.
A large focus is on what would occur inside Iran the day after the war eventually concludes.
“Much of the rhetoric that we see coming out of Washington has been originally effective, but some of the latest rhetoric coming out has not been very helpful in terms of maintaining the hearts and minds of the Iranian people inside—not those of us in exile, but those who are inside, and those who fear now, especially with this pause, whether it be called a strategic pause, off-ramp negotiation, or whatever that may be,” Youssefiani said.
