Bearlifter [he/him]

  • 0 Posts
  • 13 Comments
Joined 3 years ago
Cake day: June 21st, 2023
  • Bearlifter [he/him]@hexbear.nettonews@hexbear.net•Bulletins and International News Discussion from June 15th to June 21st, 2026 - The Memorandum of MisunderstandingEnglish
    48·
    5 days ago

    🇮🇷| ❗️Full story behind betraying Iran’s leader, as narrated by Khanalizadeh

    According to Khanalizadeh, a prominent Iranian journalist, after the Leader’s martyrdom, the US quickly asked for a ceasefire, which Iran naturally rejected.

    After the new Leader was chosen, Iranian officials prepared a 5-point plan for talks with the US, but the Leader rejected it.

    After several rounds of revision, a 10-point framework was produced, which became the basis of the first SNSC statement. The Leader also added 8 extra conditions to that framework, including that there should be no nuclear negotiations at all.

    He says the US initially accepted those 10 points as the basis because it needed a ceasefire, but once the Iranian team reached Islamabad, the Americans refused to negotiate on that basis.

    Despite the Leader’s written instruction, the Iranian side reportedly discussed the nuclear file.

    This made the Americans conclude that Iran did not really want to continue the war, and that if they pushed hard, they could extract concessions.

    After Islamabad, the negotiating team sent reports to the Leader.

    The Leader reacted negatively and objected, saying they had acted against religious/legal duty by discussing the nuclear issue and by failing to impose the 10 conditions.

    Some SNSC members then wrote to him, arguing that talks could not happen without the nuclear issue and warned about continued war and attacks on infrastructure.

    The Leader replied that “these negotiations would benefit neither their worldly affairs nor their afterlife,” and would not prevent Iran’s infrastructure from being hit.

    After that, the negotiating team restarted message exchanges, completely set aside the 10-point framework, and pursued a new 14-point plan initiated by the Foreign Ministry, which became the Islamabad MoU.

    The SNSC approved it and sent it to the Leader, but he gave no answer for about 2 weeks.

    SNSC officials then considered treating his silence as approval, but at that meeting a letter from the Leader arrived with questions for each SNSC member.

    Each member answered, and officials gave written commitments explaining how the clauses would be interpreted and implemented.

    One example given is that the “non-interference” clause (US not interfering in Iran’s affairs( would mean shutting down some hostile anti-propaganda media outlets (such as Iran International, ManotoTV, …).

    Only after these written commitments did the Leader authorize the MoU.

    Khanealizadeh says this is the context behind the Leader’s phrase: “I had a different view.”

    The Leader was not merely opposed to parts of the final MoU; he was against the whole post-Islamabad negotiation path once it moved away from the original 10-point framework.

    The process, according to him, went forward because of pressure and insistence from the SNSC.

    @FotrosResistancee

    Src: https://t.me/FotrosResistancee/22338 (video included in link)

    I do not feel good about this. I feel like it’s so joever for this chapter, Amerikka wins again just like it always does. I’m begging for something to happen, something to prove me wrong.

  • Bearlifter [he/him]@hexbear.nettonews@hexbear.net•Bulletins and International News Discussion from June 15th to June 21st, 2026 - The Memorandum of MisunderstandingEnglish
    61·
    10 days ago

    New news from Fars, Iran will not be collecting fees for 60 days. I’m not particularly a fan of that concession, it’s giving the seppos 60 free days and then a murky ‘maritime services’ afterwards.

    but then, it all falls down to if this deal will get pushed through regardless of what amerikkas rabid dog does since they haven’t received any punishment for their actions yet.

    🇮🇷 ‌New details on the text of the Iran-US understanding regarding the Strait of Hormuz — An informed source in an interview with Fars

    In the previous version, terms were included to guarantee this exercise of sovereignty and Iranian arrangements; but now it is written that the “future administration of maritime navigation services in the Strait of Hormuz” will be determined by Iran and Oman.

    The explicit use of the term “maritime services” means that the US will recognize Iran’s right to collect fees.

    This principle is repeated elsewhere in the text; in such a way that Iran will only accept 60 days of free passage for ships. This means the US has accepted the principle of fee collection and has only obtained a 60-day discount from Iran.

    But after these 60 days, the Islamic Republic of Iran intends to benefit from the financial revenues resulting from the passage of commercial ships through this strait for the country’s economic development by providing safety, navigation, environmental, and insurance services.

    In this regard, a fundamental principle was the cooperation of the other side of the Strait of Hormuz, namely the country of Oman, and the necessary negotiations to involve the Omani side have been conducted.

    @RezistanceTrench

  • Bearlifter [he/him]@hexbear.nettonews@hexbear.net•Bulletins and International News Discussion from June 8th to June 14th, 2026 - Iran Militarily Responds, As Promised, To Zionist Strikes On Beirut / Ansarallah Joins InEnglish
    11·
    11 days ago

    when i wrote the initial comment, quite a few hours ago at this point, i was basing my frustrations off what certain people in authoritative positions were saying, which was that these negotiations are going positively, to maintain unity, and to not listen to the media regarding the MOU and instead listen to the government.

    Here is what i had read before logging off out of frustrations:

    — 🇺🇸/🇮🇷 Iran’s President, Masoud Pezeshkian:

    – Recent diplomatic efforts have yielded positive results, but we are not over the finish line.

    – The reports in the media do not necessarily reflect the views of the Supreme National Security Council.

    – In the end, whatever is approved and deemed appropriate by the Supreme Leader will be mandatory for all of us.

    @Middle_East_Spectator

    this rhetoric took place after the bombings and the first thing that was said. Also, what the IRGC Aerospace Commander was also saying lead me to believe that there will be no retaliation forthcoming.

    — 🇮🇷 🇮🇷 The IRGC Aerospace Commander, Majid Mousavi, calls for unity and obeying the Leader’s command if a deal is signed:

    ‘O visionary and zealous nation, who were sent to seek revenge for the blood of the martyred Imam and made a new covenant with the present Imam in the path of realizing the lofty aspirations of the Islamic Revolution and the authority and pride of dear Iran.

    Be vigilant that obedience is a matter of commitment. So, neither take one step forward nor one step backward, but be with your Leader.

    Exactly on the path that the great Imam Khomeini, may God have mercy on him, said: Be a supporter of the guardianship of the jurist so that your country is not harmed.

    Listen to the command of the guardianship and avoid any words that endanger your sacred unity.‘

    @Middle_East_Spectator

    These statements came shortly after the bombing as well. These two had sparked my personal frustrations on this matter.

    The new information regarding a rejection of a bribe is, again, new information well past what has been said.

    So please, in the future before rushing to a correction, remind yourself that this situation is always changing and information put out a considerable amount of hours ago is subject to change at any moment.