Iran Opens Negotiation Mode

┈➤ About Enriched Uranium
╰✦ Duration of Nuclear Suspension
◾The U.S. negotiation team led by Van S proposed a plan for Iran to suspend nuclear activities for 20 years. The result was that both Trump and Iran were dissatisfied.
◾Trump publicly stated that he did not like the 20-year plan and believed Iran should completely suspend its nuclear activities.
◾Iran, on the other hand, thought 20 years was too long and expressed willingness to accept 5 years.
╰✦ Method of Nuclear Suspension
◾Trump’s goal is to have Iran hand over all enriched uranium.
◾Iran hopes to dilute the enriched uranium, with a Foreign Ministry spokesperson saying, "There is room for dialogue regarding the level and type of uranium enrichment."
◾The funniest part is Russia, whose spokesperson publicly expressed "support" for Iran, stating that Iran has the right to enrich uranium and that Russia is willing to accept all of Iran’s enriched uranium. Naturally, neither side was satisfied—America firmly rejected it, and Iran said, "It’s too early to discuss handing over enriched uranium to Russia."
(In 2015, when Iran reached an agreement with Obama, it indeed handed over a large amount of enriched uranium to Russia, which exchanged it for a large amount of natural uranium ore used for producing low-enriched uranium needed for nuclear power plants.)
┈➤ About the Strait
The U.S. definitely wants the strait to be fully open and free.
But tonight, Iran proposed a new plan: opening the strait on the Oman side.
This way, the Strait of Hormuz wouldn’t be completely closed, and Iran wouldn’t become an enemy of all countries.
Iran would only manage its own side of the strait, which reduces disputes.
The controversy lies in:
First, according to the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, artificial canals like the Suez and Panama Canals can charge tolls because they have costs, but international straits like the Malacca Strait and Gibraltar are strictly prohibited from charging transit fees.
Second, Iran has only signed the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea, but its domestic parliament has not ratified it. Iran’s actions are also controversial.
Third, Iran’s strategy is to deploy mines on its side. Ships passing through would pay protection fees rather than transit fees, which is also disputed.
Iran’s move is essentially kicking the ball back to the U.S. — if the U.S. refuses, it’s not good for global oil prices and could offend many countries. But if they agree, Iran might profit from half of the strait.
However, as seen in the diagram, even with fewer ships normally, the half of the strait is quite crowded. Oman has ratified the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea and cannot charge fees, which would make that side more congested and harm Oman’s marine ecological resources.
Additionally, if one side is open and the other has mines or other restrictions, the U.S. might station troops near Oman long-term. As a neutral country, Oman is unlikely to accept this.
┈➤ Final Remarks
In the initial phase of firing, both sides are testing each other’s bottom lines, including Trump’s closure of the strait.
Currently, both sides are probing to see what the worst acceptable outcome is.
However, the negotiations may be more complicated than we imagine.
Regarding enriched uranium, discussions need to cover suspension duration, uranium quantity, concentration, and ecological materials—uranium ore; production equipment—centrifuges; and supervision methods. The most critical is centrifuges, as they are used to re-concentrate diluted uranium.
For the strait, discussions include the level of opening, tolls, and fees.
Also, the extent of economic sanctions on Iran—whether to relax, maintain, or tighten them.
Finally, how to proportionally and sequentially unlock Iran’s frozen overseas assets.
So, these negotiations are very complex…
A more optimistic scenario is that both sides first agree on a temporary deal, fully or partially opening the Strait of Hormuz, allowing oil prices to stabilize appropriately.