By John Q. Hosedrinker 
The Supreme National Security Council of Iran has agreed to a two-week ceasefire in the ongoing war. This development, reported by The Associated Press from Dubai, signifies a potential de-escalation in the conflict.
Read the original article here
Iran’s Supreme National Security Council has announced its acceptance of a two-week ceasefire in the ongoing war, a development that appears to be rooted in a broader 10-point proposal presented by Iran. This proposal, which has apparently been accepted “in principle” by the United States, according to Iranian officials, signals a significant shift in the conflict’s trajectory. The terms of this plan are far-reaching, encompassing commitments to non-aggression, continued Iranian control over the Strait of Hormuz, and acceptance of Iran’s uranium enrichment activities.
Furthermore, the Iranian proposal outlines the lifting of all primary and secondary sanctions, the termination of all UN Security Council and IAEA resolutions, and the payment of compensation to Iran for war damages. It also includes the withdrawal of U.S. combat forces from the region and a cessation of hostilities across all fronts, even extending to actions against Hezbollah in Lebanon. These demands, if fully realized, represent a substantial victory for Iran, potentially reshaping the geopolitical landscape.
The acceptance of this 10-point plan as a basis for negotiations has led to Iran agreeing to a two-week negotiation period, scheduled to resume in Islamabad. This development has been conveyed by Pakistan, which has acted as an intermediary, suggesting that despite public pronouncements, the U.S. has, in principle, agreed to these terms. This agreement, however, is not an outright end to the conflict; Iran has made it clear that a complete cessation of hostilities will only occur once all aspects of its proposal have been finalized and implemented.
Iran’s approach has been to firmly reject any opposing proposals, instead opting to present its own comprehensive 10-point plan. Key among these demands is the notion of controlled passage through the Strait of Hormuz, to be coordinated by Iran, alongside an end to military actions against allied groups. The withdrawal of U.S. forces and the establishment of a security protocol for the Strait, affirming Iran’s central role, are also paramount. Additionally, Iran seeks full compensation for damages incurred, the removal of all sanctions and international resolutions, and the release of its frozen assets, all of which would ideally be formalized through a binding UN Security Council resolution.
This development has been acknowledged by Donald Trump, who has referenced the 10-point plan on his social media platform. The statement from Iran’s Supreme National Security Council frames the current situation as a “great victory” for Iran, attributing it to the sacrifices of its leadership and people, and asserting that the United States has been compelled to accept its 10-point plan. This perspective paints the conflict as one where Iran has emerged victorious, forcing concessions from its adversary.
The council’s statement further elaborates on the perceived military successes achieved by Iran and its allied resistance forces, detailing significant blows dealt to the enemy across regional fronts, including Lebanon, Iraq, Yemen, and Palestinian territories. The narrative suggests that these actions have crippled the enemy’s political, economic, technological, and military assets, leaving them with no alternative but to submit. The initial belief on the enemy’s part, according to this account, was to swiftly dominate Iran militarily, disrupt its capabilities, and seize its resources.
However, Iran and its allies, drawing strength from their faith and inspired by historical figures, are said to have delivered a decisive lesson, forcing the enemy into a position of humiliation. The strategy employed, characterized as one of the heaviest hybrid wars in history, allegedly achieved all planned objectives, including the destruction of U.S. military infrastructure in the region and heavy losses inflicted upon enemy forces. This pressure, it is claimed, became so intense that within a short period, the enemy recognized its inability to win, initiating requests for a ceasefire.
According to Iranian officials, these ceasefire requests were initially rejected as the war was intended to continue until key strategic goals were met, including weakening the enemy and neutralizing long-term threats. Multiple ultimatums from the U.S. were also reportedly dismissed, as Iran emphasized its refusal to recognize such deadlines. The current position is that most war objectives have been achieved, and the enemy has suffered a historic defeat, paving the way for negotiations to consolidate these gains and establish new regional security realities based on Iran’s demonstrated power.
The decision to proceed with negotiations in Islamabad, within a maximum of 15 days, is presented as a consequence of Iran’s strong battlefield position and the enemy’s inability to enforce its threats. This suggests an “off-ramp” facilitated by Pakistan’s Prime Minister, with the United States appearing to use Iran’s 10-point plan as the foundation for these critical ceasefire negotiations. The situation has led to a complex interplay of claims and counter-claims, with some observers questioning the sincerity of the ceasefire and the potential for renewed hostilities, particularly in light of Israel’s involvement and the broader regional dynamics.
The reported acceptance of a two-week ceasefire, coupled with the agreement in principle to Iran’s comprehensive 10-point plan, suggests a potentially significant de-escalation, though the finalization of terms and the long-term implications remain to be seen. The opening of the Strait of Hormuz for a specified period, under Iranian coordination, is a crucial element, and its continued closure or any violation of the terms would undoubtedly lead to further escalation. The motivations behind these developments, whether driven by a desire for peace or strategic maneuvering, are subject to much speculation, but the immediate focus is on whether this two-week window will lead to a lasting resolution.