ABD-İran müzakerelerinde Trump'ın sıfır zenginleştirme şartı anlaşmayı tıkıyor
ABD ile İran arasında aylardır süren çatışmayı sonlandırmak için yürütülen müzakerelerde, Başkan Trump'ın İran'ın hiçbir düzeyde uranyum zenginleştirme yapmaması talebi kritik bir engel haline geldi. Analistler, bu koşulun diplomasiyi zehirlediğini ve tarafların pozisyonlarını sertleştirdiğini belirtiyor. Trump görüşmelerin 'son aşamada' olduğunu ve İran'ın anlaşmaya istekli olduğunu söylese de Tahran yönetimi, ABD'nin teklifini incelediğini ancak nihai bir anlaşmaya varılmadığını vurguluyor. Avrupa Birliği olası ilerlemeyi memnuniyetle karşılarken, İsrail ve ABD'li Cumhuriyetçi şahinler, anlaşmanın İran'a büyük tavizler içerdiğini öne sürerek sert eleştiriler yöneltiyor. 60 günlük ateşkes ve Hürmüz Boğazı'nın yeniden açılmasını öngören çerçevenin ayrıntıları netleşirken, İran tarafı olası cömert tekliflerin yeni askeri hazırlıklara işaret edebileceğinden şüphe duyuyor ve Washington'dan askeri gerilimi düşüren somut adımlar bekliyor. Trump'ın Abraham Anlaşmaları'na uyumu şart koşması ve bölgede Ürdün'ün Mescid-i Aksa'daki rolünü hedef alan iddialar, diplomatik çabanın sadece nükleer meseleyle sınırlı kalmadığını, daha geniş bölgesel dengeleri etkilediğini gösteriyor. Tüm bu etkenler, müzakerelerin kırılganlığını ve uzlaşıya giden yolun henüz net olmadığını ortaya koyuyor.
This summary is currently in Turkish; automated English translation is coming soon.
Bağlam, hikayenin etrafındaki ülke + lider + komşu hikaye ağına dayanılarak AI tarafından üretildi. Olgu içerikleri için her zaman üstteki kaynak linklerine başvurun.
Bu gündemi takip et
ABD gelişmelerini kaçırma — ücretsiz kaydol, günlük brifinginde gör.
Timeline
latest: 30 May- Diplomatic18 May, 22:55
Analyst says Trump’s Iran demand blocks path to deal
Analyst says Trump’s Iran demand blocks path to deal A US foreign policy analyst has said Washington’s stance on Iran is undermining prospects for a diplomatic agreement. Matt Duss, executive vice president at the Center for International Policy, argued that the demand for zero uranium enrichment has hardened positions and stalled negotiations. In a post on X, he said the condition was “a poison pill pushed on him” by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and “warmongers” in Washington who “wanted a war”. Duss said a breakthrough would require a shift in policy. “A deal will become possible when Trump reverses that mistake,” he added.
- Security20 May, 01:41
Trump says Iran eager to make deal as conflict continues
Trump says Iran eager to make deal as conflict continues US President Donald Trump said the war involving Iran would end “very quickly”, adding that Tehran was eager to reach a deal and that the United States would ensure Iran could not obtain a nuclear weapon. Trump said Washington had done “an amazing job in Iran”, adding that he hoped for a peaceful resolution to the conflict. Trump also predicted that oil prices would soon fall sharply due to an expected oversupply in global markets. He said Iranians were “tired of the conflict” and voiced optimism about achieving a quick settlement and ending the war through diplomacy.
- Diplomatic20 May, 19:58
Iran examining U.S. proposal, as Trump says in ‘final stages’ of talks
Iran’s Foreign Ministry spokesman Esmaeil Baqaei said the Islamic Republic had “received the points of view of the American side and we are currently examining them”
- Economic20 May, 23:50
Asia markets set to rise as Trump says negotiations between Iran and the U.S. in 'final stage'
Asia-Pacific markets were set to rise, amid growing hopes that the Middle East conflict could soon end following Trump's comments and as oil prices cool.
- Political22 May, 11:45
The Key Sticking Points for a US-Iran Peace Deal
The US and Iran have been locked in a stalemate since agreeing to a ceasefire in April. They’ve been unable to reach a deal to end a monthslong war that has killed thousands of people and sparked a global energy crunch.
- Security24 May, 09:49
European Commission President welcomes possible peace deal
European Commission President welcomes possible peace deal European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen on Sunday welcomed signs of progress in talks over a possible peace deal between the United States and Iran. "I welcome the progress towards an agreement between the US and Iran. We need a deal that truly de-escalates the conflict, reopens the Strait of Hormuz and guarantees toll-free full freedom of navigation. Iran must not be allowed to develop a nuclear weapon," von der Leyen wrote on X. U.S. President Donald Trump said earlier that Washington and Iran have "largely negotiated" a memorandum of understanding on a peace deal that would reopen the Strait of Hormuz.
- Diplomatic24 May, 11:00
'Nightmare for Israel': Republican hawks attack Trump's emerging Iran deal
'Nightmare for Israel': Republican hawks attack Trump's emerging Iran deal MEE staff on Sun, 05/24/2026 - 11:35 Republicans fear the proposed ceasefire agreement is a major concession that would allow Tehran to retain regional influence US Senator Lindsey Graham speaks during a bill signing in the Oval Office of the White House on 3 February 2026 (Alex Wong/Getty Images via AFP) Off Senior US Republicans have launched a rare public rebuke of President Donald Trump over the reported terms of the ceasefire agreement with Iran, warning they include major concessions that would strengthen Tehran and undermine Israel. The criticism intensified on Sunday after Trump said a memorandum of understanding to end the US-Israeli war on Iran had been "largely negotiated" and was awaiting finalisation. Trump said the agreement would include reopening the Strait of Hormuz, the vital global energy chokepoint that Iran has effectively controlled since the war began in late February. Her did not mention Iran's nuclear programme, despite repeatedly insisting that Iran would not be allowed to attain nuclear weapons. Iran's Foreign Ministry spokesperson Esmaeil Baghaei said on Saturday that Tehran was finalising a memorandum of understanding that would serve as an initial framework agreement lasting between 30 and 60 days. (adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({}); According to Baghaei, the proposed 14-clause framework would cover issues including the Strait of Hormuz, the US naval blockade on Iran, and ending the war "on all fronts", including Lebanon. Reports have since suggested the possible release of frozen Iranian assets. Iranian officials, however, have publicly insisted that nuclear issues are not a part of the current negotiations, with senior Iranian officials denying Tehran has agreed to surrender its stockpile of highly enriched uranium. Weeks of negotiations since an 8 April ceasefire – including historic face-to-face talks in Islamabad – have yet to produce a permanent resolution or fully reopen the strait, triggering the largest oil supply disruption in global history. However, the apparent concessions by Washington have triggered alarm among several Republican foreign policy hawks who strongly backed the war. Senator Lindsey Graham warned on Saturday that any agreement leaving Iran militarily capable and politically intact would become a "nightmare for Israel". (adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({}); "If a deal is struck to end the Iranian conflict because it is believed that the Strait of Hormuz cannot be protected from Iranian terrorism and Iran still possesses the capability to destroy major Gulf oil infrastructure, then Iran will be perceived as being a dominant force requiring a diplomatic solution," Graham wrote on X. He added that Iran's perceived ability to threaten Gulf energy infrastructure "in perpetuity" would fundamentally shift the regional balance of power. The criticism was amplified by other senior Republicans, including Senator Tom Cotton, chair of the Senate Intelligence Committee, who reposted Graham's comments. Senator Roger Wicker, chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, said the "rumoured 60-day ceasefire" would be "a disaster". "Everything accomplished by Operation Epic Fury would be for naught," Wicker wrote, using Washington's name for the war against Iran. Earlier in the week, Wicker accused unnamed administration officials of pushing Trump towards "a deal that would not be worth the paper it is written on" instead of allowing the president to "finish the job he started". Republican infighting Senator Ted Cruz also joined the criticism, saying he was "deeply concerned" by reports about the emerging agreement. "If the result of all that is to be an Iranian regime – still run by Islamists who chant 'death to America' – now receiving billions of dollars, being able to enrich uranium & develop nuclear weapons, and having effective control over the Strait of Hormuz, then that outcome would be a disastrous mistake," Cruz wrote on X. Unlike some other Republicans, Cruz explicitly referenced Trump by name while attempting to place blame on unnamed advisers "pushing" the deal within the administration. Former Secretary of State Mike Pompeo delivered some of the sharpest criticism, comparing the emerging framework to the 2015 nuclear agreement negotiated under former President Barack Obama. (adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({}); "The deal being floated with Iran seems straight out of the Wendy Sherman-Robert Malley-Ben Rhodes playbook," Pompeo wrote, referring to officials associated with Obama-era diplomacy with Tehran. Trump went to Beijing to talk Iran. He came back empty-handed Read More » Calling the reported terms "not remotely America First," Pompeo argued the US should instead continue pressuring Iran economically and militarily. Former national security adviser John Bolton also dismissed the negotiations entirely, saying talks with Tehran were "a waste of oxygen". Over the last week, Trump has alternated between renewing threats of escalation, including posting a picture on Saturday of Iran covered in a US flag. During an interview with the US broadcaster CBS on Saturday, Trump said that the two sides were "getting a lot closer" to a deal, but also warned that if they do not reach an agreement "we're going to have a situation where no country will ever be hit as hard as they’re about to be hit”. In a separate interview with the news outlet Axios, Trump said that the chances of a deal were a "solid 50/50". "I think one of two things will happen: either I hit them harder than they have ever been hit, or we are going to sign a deal that is good," he said. US Secretary of State Marco Rubio also struck an optimistic tone on Saturday, telling reporters during his trip to India that "some progress" had been made, adding, "even as I speak to you now, there's some work being done". War on Iran News Post Date Override 0 Update Date Mon, 05/04/2020 - 21:19 Update Date Override 0
- Security24 May, 16:23
Pro-Israeli Republicans come out against a deal with Iran
Pro-Israeli Republicans come out against a deal with Iran US Republicans are divided over reports of a potential deal with Iran, exposing fractures within Donald Trump’s own political base. Senator Ted Cruz said he is “deeply concerned” about what such an agreement could involve, warning it could hand Tehran major concessions. Writing on X, Cruz said Trump was “right” to strike Iran but warned it would be a “disastrous mistake” if the outcome allows Iran to receive “billions of dollars, being able to enrich uranium & develop nuclear weapons, and having effective control over the Strait of Hormuz”. Others struck a different tone. Congressman Thomas Massie told NBC the deal may be worthwhile if figures like Cruz and Senator Lindsey Graham oppose it, suggesting internal pushback signals compromise. Senator Thom Tillis also questioned the logic behind the talks, saying it does not “make sense” that Washington could accept nuclear material remaining in Iran after earlier claims it had been neutralised. By contrast, Senate Republican leader John Barrasso backed Trump’s approach, saying the president had forced Iran to negotiate “through a position of American strength”, while acknowledging that details remain unclear. No agreement has been finalised, and the terms of any potential deal remain uncertain.
- Security24 May, 16:43
Iran wary of generous US deal
Iran wary of generous US deal A leading analyst says Tehran will view any generous US offer with suspicion, fearing it could mask preparations for further military action. Vali Nasr, a professor of international affairs and Middle East studies at Johns Hopkins University, said Iran will look for clear signs that Washington is stepping back militarily. “Iran will be focused on evidence of a US military backdown. And the final decision on such a gamble in trusting the US will fall squarely on Mojtaba’s shoulders,” Nasr said on X. He added that the stakes are unusually high for Iran’s leadership. “It is the first major decision he will take as supreme leader, with significant consequences,” Nasr added. https://x.com/vali_nasr/status/2058508967672730111
- Security24 May, 20:45
Israel warns Iran-US deal ‘not good’: Report
Israel warns Iran-US deal ‘not good’: Report Israeli officials have criticised the emerging agreement between Washington and Tehran, warning it fails to address what they describe as broader threats beyond Iran’s nuclear programme. Speaking to Israeli media, one official said the proposed framework leaves major issues unresolved. “The framework agreement is not good, and even if a final agreement is signed and all enriched uranium is removed from Iran, which is a big ‘if’, the deal does not address the issue of Iran’s missile program or its network of regional proxies,” the official said. Officials in Jerusalem also fear the deal could limit Israel’s operational freedom, particularly in Lebanon and across the wider region. “Nothing is final yet, but this is an agreement that could affect whether and how we are able to operate,” an Israeli official told The Jerusalem Post.
- Security25 May, 12:23
'Failure': Israel reacts with alarm as emerging US-Iran deal draws criticism
'Failure': Israel reacts with alarm as emerging US-Iran deal draws criticism Nadav Rapaport on Mon, 05/25/2026 - 12:45 Israeli analysts and hawkish US politicians say proposed agreement falls far short of war aims and signals weakening Israeli influence in Washington A woman reacts as people gather at the Tel Aviv 360, a giant beachfront stage in Tel Aviv on 16 May 2026, to watch the final of the Eurovision Song Contest 2026 (Jack Guez/AFP) Off The emerging agreement between the United States and Iran to permanently end the war has been met with scepticism and growing alarm in Israel. Reports over the weekend said the deal centres on a memorandum of understanding establishing a preliminary 60-day ceasefire, which reportedly does not address Iran’s nuclear programme. The initial framework is also said to include ending wars “on all fronts”, including Lebanon. The reported terms have drawn criticism from US Democrats, hawkish Republicans and Israeli commentators alike. Amid mounting backlash, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said on Sunday that he had agreed with US President Donald Trump that “any final agreement with Iran must eliminate the nuclear threat”. (adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({}); Netanyahu also said Trump had reaffirmed “Israel’s right to defend itself against threats on every front, including Lebanon”. Trump, meanwhile, has defended the negotiations on his Truth Social platform. “If I make a deal with Iran, it will be a good and proper one, not like the one made by Obama,” Trump wrote, referring to the 2015 nuclear agreement signed under former president Barack Obama. “I don’t make bad deals,” he added. 'Failure' But Israeli journalists and military analysts appeared unconvinced by the reassurances from either leader, with many portraying the emerging agreement as a political failure and a strategic climbdown by both the US and Israel. (adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({}); Amos Harel, military affairs commentator for Haaretz, wrote on Monday that a deal would amount to an American capitulation and reflect Israel’s declining standing within the Trump administration. Harel argued that the agreement falls far short of Netanyahu’s declared objectives when the war began in late February, including the collapse of the Iranian government and the dismantling of Iran’s nuclear and ballistic missile programmes. 'Israeli interests were not taken into account throughout the negotiations' - Senior Israeli security official Danny Citrinowicz, an Iran specialist at the Institute for National Security Studies (INSS), echoed that assessment, saying the military campaign’s architects “did not truly understand Iran”. “The enormous gap between the declarations made at the beginning of the campaign and the agreement that will likely bring it to an end illustrates its failure,” Citrinowicz said on Monday. "This war proved that Benjamin Netanyahu’s strategy has collapsed.” Raz Zimmt, also a researcher at INSS, described the proposed agreement as “very problematic” for Israel and argued that Iran had succeeded in shaping “a new regional order”. "The one who blinked first was President Trump, not the Iranians," Zimmt told the 103FM radio programme. Veteran political columnist Nahum Barnea of Yedioth Ahronoth wrote on Monday that the emerging deal would represent a “defeat” for both Israel and the United States. He wrote that Netanyahu and Trump “never imagined” that after nearly three months, Iran would be in a better position than it was before the war. Barnea added that Israel was now “subject to the absolute authority of a capricious, hollow, desperate American president” and argued that while Israel still faces the challenge of confronting Iran, “Netanyahu is the last person” capable of leading that effort. Security officials alarmed The criticism comes amid growing concern in Israel over what many see as the country’s diminishing influence in Washington. (adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({}); On Saturday, the New York Times reported that Israel had largely been sidelined from the ongoing negotiations by the Trump administration. Meanwhile, Haaretz reported on Sunday that senior Israeli security officials were alarmed by the direction of the talks and warned that “Israeli interests were not taken into account throughout the negotiations”. Why Israel and the US were so deadly wrong about regime change in Iran Read More » According to the report, officials expressed frustration that despite Israel’s joint military campaign against Iran, Washington had failed to prioritise Israel’s security concerns. The officials are now said to fear that a US-Iran agreement could place restrictions on Israel’s future military operations in Lebanon and Gaza. Israeli news outlet Ynet also reported that army officials viewed the proposed agreement as “a bad agreement for Israel” and were deeply disappointed by its reported terms. According to the report, the Israeli military had already been preparing for a renewed campaign against Iran and believed the agreement would fall short of its strategic objectives, potentially leaving Iran as a “nuclear threshold state”. David Bitan, a member of the Knesset from Netanyahu’s Likud party, acknowledged on Monday that expectations in Israel at the start of the war had been unrealistically high. Still, he insisted Israel had achieved significant gains during the 40-day conflict. Asked about Iran’s ballistic missile capabilities, Bitan said Israel would “have to deal with it again and again”, adding that he believed further rounds of conflict with Iran were likely every two to three years. War on Iran Tel Aviv, Israel News Post Date Override 0 Update Date Mon, 05/04/2020 - 21:19 Update Date Override 0
- Diplomatic25 May, 15:28
What we know so far about the US-Iran deal
What we know so far about the US-Iran deal MEE staff on Mon, 05/25/2026 - 15:34 Agreement would begin with 60-day ceasefire, during which Strait of Hormuz would open again US President Donald Trump speaks to members of the media after returning to the White House in Washington on 15 May 2026 (Kevin Dietsch/Getty Images via AFP) Off US President Donald Trump has indicated that a potential deal between the US and Iran is “largely negotiated”. If agreed, it could bring to an end a regional conflict which has lasted almost three months. Markets were upbeat about the prospect of a deal on Monday morning, with Brent crude oil prices dropping nearly 6 percent to $97 a barrel. The full terms of the deal are not public, but here’s what we know so far: What will the deal entail? Tehran and Washington are close to signing a deal that would begin with a 60-day ceasefire extension, according to a US official cited by Axios. During that time, the Strait of Hormuz - the narrow waterway through which a fifth of the world’s crude oil and liquified natural gas travels - would be reopened. (adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({}); There would be no tolls to pass through the strait, and Iran would clear the mines it has laid near the waterway. Once those mines are cleared, the US would lift its own blockade on Iranian ports which have been in place in recent weeks. Iran would also be permitted to sell oil during those two months, temporarily circumventing US sanctions. The American official told Axios that while this would benefit Iran’s economy, it would also ease pressure on global oil markets. The two sides would then use the time to negotiate over Iran’s nuclear programme. As part of the wider talks on a permanent ceasefire, Iran wants its assets around the world to be unfrozen immediately, as well as permanent sanctions relief. (adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({}); The US official said such concessions would only be made if Tehran made “tangible concessions”. What about Iran’s nuclear programme? Sources told Axios that a draft of the memorandum of understanding between the two - which is yet to be agreed - included a commitment from Iran never to pursue nuclear weapons. There’s no evidence that Tehran has agreed to such a stipulation. The draft also suggests that Iran would negotiate over suspending its uranium enrichment and over the removal of its existing stockpile of highly enriched uranium. A US official told the Washington Post that the next two months would be spent discussing “the mechanism” for such a nuclear deal. (adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({}); An Iranian official told the Post that the draft deal did not include a nuclear agreement, but rather a commitment to negotiate the nuclear issue at a later time. How has Trump responded? Over the weekend, Trump faced criticism from US lawmakers on both sides of the political divide about the deal, and the war itself. He responded by stating that he does not make bad deals. “If I make a deal with Iran, it will be a good and proper one, not like the one made by Obama,” Trump wrote on Truth Social. “Don’t listen to the losers, who are critical about something they know nothing about. Unlike those before me who should have solved this problem many years ago, I don’t make bad deals!” 'Failure': Israel reacts with alarm as emerging US-Iran deal draws criticism Read More » Later on Monday, he said that negotiations were “proceeding nicely”, and added that he wanted more countries to join the Abraham Accords. Trump listed countries whose leaders he said he spoke with on Saturday about efforts to end the war on Iran. “After all the work done by the United States to try and pull this very complex puzzle together, it should be mandatory that all of these Countries, at a minimum, simultaneously, sign onto the Abraham Accords,” he said. “Those Countries discussed are Saudi Arabia, The United Arab Emirates (already a Member!), Qatar, Pakistan, Turkiye, Egypt, Jordan, and Bahrain (already a Member!)” The Abraham Accords refer to normalisation deals with Israel brokered by Trump during his first term in 2020. They were signed by the UAE, Bahrain, Morocco and Sudan. Two of the countries mentioned by Trump, Jordan and Egypt, already have relations with Israel. What did Iran say? Iran’s foreign ministry spokesperson Esmaeil Baghaei said on Monday that Tehran and Washington have reached conclusions on several issues discussed as part of the potential memorandum of understanding. However, he stressed that this should not be interpreted as meaning that Iran is close to signing any agreement. Baghaei said Iran’s current negotiations are focused on ending the war, not on nuclear issues. He also repeated Tehran’s concern that shifting positions among US officials continue to complicate efforts to reach a deal. War on Iran News Post Date Override 0 Update Date Mon, 05/04/2020 - 21:19 Update Date Override 0
- Political25 May, 16:00
US and Israel 'actively working' to strip Jordan of Al-Aqsa custodianship, sources say
US and Israel 'actively working' to strip Jordan of Al-Aqsa custodianship, sources say Faisal Edroos on Mon, 05/25/2026 - 09:45 The plan has sparked fears that regional and international actors are seeking to sideline Jordan's role in Jerusalem in favour of a new arrangement closely aligned with Israeli interests This aerial image taken on 22 March 2023 shows the Dome of the Rock and Al-Aqsa Mosque on the compound in Jerusalem's Old City (Ilan Rosenberg/Reuters) On The US and Israel are "actively working" to strip Jordan of its historic custodianship of Jerusalem's Al-Aqsa Mosque compound, and are pursuing a new arrangement that would see the management of the revered Muslim site closely align with Israeli interests, multiple sources have told Middle East Eye. US, Jordanian and Palestinian officials, as well as western and Gulf Arab sources, told MEE that under the plan, championed by President Donald Trump's son-in-law Jared Kushner and the US Ambassador to Israel Mike Huckabee, the authority of the Jordanian-backed Islamic Waqf would abruptly end and a new body created by the Israeli government would declare the Al-Aqsa Mosque a "multi-faith centre". According to the officials, all of whom requested anonymity to discuss sensitive matters, the "new arrangement" would grant Jews "equal access" to the Muslim site and formally allow large-group Jewish prayer. Israel would also have a major say over the appointment of imams, preachers and senior mosque officials, and would also be involved in signing off on the content mentioned in Friday sermons. Two US officials told MEE that Washington had drafted a paper on how they envisaged the mosque's future. The officials said that the Trump administration would like to see the Al-Aqsa Mosque stripped of its Muslim identity, with the site turned into a landmark tourist attraction that hosts all three Abrahamic religions. (adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({}); A western official, and a source briefed by the Jordanian government, told MEE that according to a proposal they had seen, Arab countries could be granted "rotational" oversight of the Al-Aqsa Mosque compound. They said that Bahrain, Egypt, Morocco and the United Arab Emirates (UAE) had all been briefed on the proposal by the US. According to two Gulf Arab sources and another source familiar with the Jordanian government's thinking, Saudi Arabia, which shares a deep history and a robust alliance with Jordan, was against the proposal. 'The Hashemite Custodianship is a cornerstone for stability in the region, undermining it is tantamount to undermining the very principles for peace - Mustafa Abu Sway, Waqf council The sources said that Israel had first floated the idea with the Trump administration nearly a decade ago, but shortly after Huckabee assumed his post as US ambassador last year he "repeatedly" called on Washington to follow through with the plan. The US envoy, a devout Evangelical Christian and former talk show host, is a long-time pro-Israel advocate who has staunchly supported illegal Israeli settlement in the occupied Palestinian territories. The source familiar with Amman's thinking told MEE that "the Americans have been angry that the Jordanians cite their custodianship and raise complaints about Israeli actions at Al-Aqsa." Just this month, Jordan's parliament condemned Israeli measures to seize Palestinian properties and Islamic endowments in an area adjacent to the Al-Aqsa Mosque. All of the sources MEE spoke said the new proposal left the fate of Jerusalem's Christian holy sites unknown. The Hashemite monarchy is also custodan of the Church of the Holy Sepulchre and the Church of the Ascension. Jordan also has an effective veto over the appointment of the Greek Orthodox Patriarch of Jerusalem. "This plan says nothing about the Christian sites, which raises a whole new set of concerns," one of the sources said. A Jordanian government official stressed that Amman's position on Jerusalem and its holy sites "remains firm," and said the Hashemite custodianship is internationally recognised under treaties and agreements including Article 9 of the 1994 Jordan-Israel peace treaty. The official added that Jordan was coordinating with Palestinian, Arab and international partners to preserve the sites' "Arab, Islamic and Christian identity" and prevent any alteration to the historical and legal status quo. 'Cornerstone for stability' The Al-Aqsa Mosque has been governed under a decades-long status quo, or international arrangement, preserving its religious status as an exclusively Islamic site. Under arrangements reached after the 1967 war, Jordan and Israel agreed that the Islamic Waqf would administer internal affairs at the compound, while Israel would control external security. The Israeli unmaking of the Ibrahimi Mosque Read More » Non-Muslims are permitted to visit the site during designated hours, but are not allowed to pray there. For Jews, the site is known as the Temple Mount, where many believe two ancient Jewish temples once stood - the temple built by King Solomon (Suleiman in Arabic), which was destroyed by the Babylonians, and the second temple, destroyed by the Romans. Jordanian and Palestinian officials said the proposed arrangement appeared to be loosely modelled on Israel's policies at the Ibrahimi Mosque in Hebron, where restrictions imposed after a 1994 massacre by an Israeli settler eventually led to a formal division of the site between Muslims and Jews. Following the massacre, Israel allocated 63 percent for Jewish worship and 37 percent for Muslims, despite the site being revered by Muslims, Christians and Jews alike as the burial place of the Prophet Abraham and other patriarchs. For Jordan, custodianship over the Al-Aqsa Mosque and the wider compound is central to the legitimacy of the Hashemite monarchy itself. Jordan's ruling family traces its custodianship over Muslim and Christian holy sites in Jerusalem to 1924, when Palestine was under British mandate rule. (adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({}); Britain and France divided much of the Levant between them after defeating the Ottoman Empire during World War I, which led to the formal collapse of the Islamic Caliphate in 1924. The Hashemites were granted custodianship in Jerusalem after losing control of Islam's two holiest cities, Mecca and Medina, to the Al-Saud family. Jordan's role as custodian was later recognised in its 1994 peace treaty with Israel, which acknowledged Amman's "special role" in Jerusalem's Islamic holy sites. 'The settlers are in control': How the West Bank is being ethnically cleansed Read More » But for years, Jordanian officials and Palestinian leaders have warned that the arrangement has been steadily eroded by successive Israeli governments and emboldened far-right groups seeking greater Jewish control over the compound. Israeli police raids inside the mosque compound, increasing visits by ultranationalist Jewish activists and repeated calls by Israeli ministers for Jewish prayer rights at the site have fuelled accusations that Israel is incrementally changing the status quo. Waqf officials have also repeatedly told MEE that other than imposing strict restrictions on Palestinian worshippers, Israel had made it difficult for the Waqf to carry out necessary maintenance works and repairs. Mustafa Abu Sway, the deputy head of the Waqf council, refused to comment on Jordan's waning influence in the Old City but said the Hashemite custodianship was "a cornerstone for stability in the region". He said Palestinians viewed the custodianship "strategically as a lifeline" and noted that Jordan had consistently defended the historical status quo at international forums including Unesco. "The Hashemite Custodianship is a cornerstone for stability in the region, undermining it is tantamount to undermining the very principles for peace". For its part, the Jerusalem Governorate said it had not been informed of any such proposal, but said it "reject[s] it entirely." The Governorate said there had been a "dangerous escalation" in Israeli interference in the Waqf's work, including restrictions on guards and staff and increasing settler incursions into the compound. (adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({}); Jordan plans 'work-around' Two Gulf Arab sources told MEE that Jordan's US-backed government was likely going to rely on regional backing to counter the US-Israeli proposal. Despite Amman's growing outreach to the UAE, they said it was inconceivable that Riyadh would remain silent or refuse to publicly oppose such a proposal. "Saudi Arabia fully understands that if any moves are taken against the Hashemite custodianship then that would inflame the entire region," one Gulf Arab source said. 'They [UAE and Bahrain] should be cautious about publicly supporting changes to the status quo' - Gulf Arab source Another Gulf Arab source said Riyadh viewed the custodianship as "a pillar of regional stability," adding: "The Saudis may have disagreements with Jordan on some issues, but on Jerusalem and Al-Aqsa they understand the consequences of dismantling the existing arrangement". According to the sources, Jordan's Crown Prince Hussein bin Abdullah has developed a "good relationship" with his Saudi counterpart, Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, in recent years, with ties deepening since a group of Arab countries normalised ties with Israel. But both of the sources said it was unclear how the kingdom would respond if the UAE or Bahrain publicy backed the proposal. Since signing the Abraham Accords in 2020, both Abu Dhabi and Manama have steadily deepened political, economic and security ties with Israel, even as regional anger over Israel's actions in Jerusalem and Gaza have intensified. The UAE, in particular, has positioned itself as Israel's closest Arab partner, expanding cooperation in trade, technology, energy and defence. Emirati-linked religious and diplomatic initiatives have also promoted the idea of "multi-faith coexistence" in ways that Palestinian and Jordanian officials fear could be used to legitimise changes to the historical status quo at Al-Aqsa Mosque. Why Netanyahu leaked his secret wartime visit to the UAE Read More » In 2023, the UAE established its own multi-faith centre that includes a Catholic church, a Jewish synagogue and an Islamic mosque. Bahrain has similarly maintained close ties with Israel and defended its engagement with Israel as necessary for countering Iran. Bahraini officials have also generally avoided direct public criticism of Israeli policies in Jerusalem, a position that has fuelled concerns that they are increasingly willing to accommodate Israeli demands over holy sites. "They [UAE and Bahrain] understand how explosive this issue is in the Arab and Muslim world," one of the sources said. "Given that they are closely aligned with Israel they should be cautious about publicly supporting changes to the status quo," they added. MEE reached out to the Bahraini, Egyptian, Moroccan, Saudi and UAE foreign ministries for comment but did not receive a response by time of publication. The Jordanian government, which has banned MEE since May 2025, acknowledged receiving our questions but refused to comment. Occupation Sean Mathews Lubna Masarwa Athens Jerusalem London Exclusive: US and Israel 'actively working' to strip Jordan of Al-Aqsa custodianship, sources say News Post Date Override 0 Update Date Mon, 05/04/2020 - 21:19 Update Date Override 0
- Security25 May, 21:00
Trump calls for 'mandatory' adherence to Abraham Accords in Iran ceasefire talks
Trump calls for 'mandatory' adherence to Abraham Accords in Iran ceasefire talks Sean Mathews on Mon, 05/25/2026 - 21:26 An Arab diplomat told MEE that Trump appeared to be trying to find a 'lubricant' in the Iran ceasefire deal for Israel US President Donald Trump delivers remarks during a Memorial Day ceremony at Arlington National Cemetery in Arlington, Virginia, on 25 May 2026 (Kevin Dietsch/Getty Images/AFP) Off US President Donald Trump on Monday threw a new wrench into any deal to end the war on Iran, saying that Saudi Arabia and other Muslim-majority nations must normalise ties with Israel as part of efforts to reach a deal. The remarks took a US diplomat and an Arab diplomat by surprise. Both said that it was unlikely there would be any movement on normalisation. The Arab official told MEE that Trump may be using normalisation as a “lubricant” to ensure Israeli buy-in for any deal with Iran. Israel on Monday escalated its strikes on Lebanon, with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu saying that he had ordered the military to "crush" Hezbollah. Iran has been adamant that any agreement to end the war include Lebanon. "After all the work done by the United States to try and pull this very complex puzzle together, it should be mandatory that all of these Countries, at a minimum, simultaneously, sign onto the Abraham Accords," Trump wrote in a lengthy social media post. "Those Countries discussed are Saudi Arabia, The United Arab Emirates (already a Member!), Qatar, Pakistan, Turkiye, Egypt, Jordan, and Bahrain (already a Member!).” (adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({}); Trump considers the 2020 Abraham Accords, through which the UAE, Bahrain and Morocco normalised ties with Israel, as a major foreign policy achievement. But several of the countries he listed already have diplomatic ties with Israel, although they have become seriously strained by Israel’s genocide in Gaza, where more than 72,790 Palestinians have been killed, and military adventurism against Syria, Lebanon and Iran. Egypt and Israel established diplomatic ties in 1979, and Jordan followed in 1994. Turkey was the first Muslim-majority country to recognise Israel in 1949. The US has been lobbying Saudi Arabia for years to normalise ties with Israel. Riyadh mulled the idea in exchange for US weapons and nuclear technology before 7 October 2023, but Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman has since publicly accused Israel of committing genocide in Gaza and has tied recognition explicitly to the establishment of a Palestinian state. Pakistan, the Muslim world’s only nuclear-armed state, also has a chilly opinion of Israel. Meanwhile, Qatar was attacked by Israel in September 2025, when the latter targeted Hamas negotiators in Doha. Shortly after Trump’s social media post, an unidentified Saudi source reiterated to several major US news outlets that the kingdom would only normalise ties with Israel if it agreed to "an irreversible pathway to a Palestinian state”. (adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({}); Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman brushed off a similar request by Trump in November 2025 at the White House to normalise ties with Israel. Oil prices tumble on hopes of deal Trump’s social media post on Monday comes after his earlier announcement that a deal with Iran to end the war was almost at hand. The US president said over the weekend that a deal had “largely been negotiated”. US Secretary of State Marco Rubio suggested a deal could be reached within the day, causing world oil prices to tumble based on renewed optimism about an agreement. UAE and Israel established fund for joint defence acquisition, sources say Read More » "We thought we might have some news last night, maybe today," Rubio told reporters during a visit to New Delhi, referring to hopes for a deal. "We have what I think is a pretty solid thing on the table in terms of their ability to open up the straits, get the straits open.” Crude oil prices tumbled six percent on optimism of a deal. But Iranian foreign ministry spokesman Esmaeil Baghaei poured cold water on hopes of a quick final settlement. "It is correct to say that we have reached a conclusion on a large portion of the issues under discussion," he told a weekly news briefing on Monday. "But to say that this means the signing of an agreement is imminent - no one can make such a claim." US and Iranian forces have observed a shaky ceasefire since 8 April. Both sides have sought the upper hand at the negotiating table for a wider deal with competing blockades of the Strait of Hormuz, where roughly 20 percent of the world’s energy flows. Both sides were still engaging in diplomacy as Washington closed for a Memorial Day holiday and the Middle East prepared for Eid al-Adha. (adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({}); A high-level Iranian delegation, including the country's top negotiator and foreign minister, was in Doha on Monday to discuss an agreement with the US and the release of frozen funds, according to US and Israeli media reports. Meanwhile, Pakistani Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif, whose government is spearheading efforts to mediate a negotiated agreement between the US and Iran, met China's President Xi Jinping in Beijing. Speaking to Chinese leaders, Sharif said "the world is passing through a critical moment," Pakistan's state-run PTV channel showed. War on Iran News Post Date Override 0 Update Date Mon, 05/04/2020 - 21:19 Update Date Override 0
- Political28 May, 15:59
Why Jordan cannot be stripped of Al-Aqsa custodianship
Why Jordan cannot be stripped of Al-Aqsa custodianship Mustafa Abu Sway on Thu, 05/28/2026 - 15:55 Tampering with the Hashemite status quo at Jerusalem's holy sites would put the region and the world on a collision course The author is pictured with Father Nabil Haddad at the Royal Hashemite Court in Amman, Jordan, in December 2025 (Supplied photo) Off Despite Washington’s long-standing recognition of Jordan as the custodian of Muslim and Christian holy sites in Jerusalem, including Al-Aqsa Mosque, Middle East Eye has reported that the US and Israel are “actively working” to dismantle this arrangement. The failure of the war on Iran to achieve its goals, the upcoming US midterms this fall, and the Israeli legislative elections slated for October - which could take place even earlier if the coalition government falls - might be driving American and Israeli leaders to look for other “achievements”. US President Donald Trump recently dangled another red herring, threatening not to sign a deal with Iran if Saudi Arabia and other countries do not join the Abraham Accords. Trump knows this is a no-go; it ignores the elephant in the room, addressed by the 2002 Saudi-led Arab Peace Initiative, which conditioned normalisation with Israel on a credible path to Palestinian statehood. Saudi Arabia has confirmed this position time and again. Meanwhile, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, despite his periodic lip service to the historical status quo, has allowed his far-right national security minister, Itamar Ben Gvir, to erode it through repeated incursions at Al-Aqsa complex. (adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({}); Storming the holy site to influence elections is not a new tactic. A provocative visit in the year 2000 by former Likud leader Ariel Sharon, protected by a large contingent of Israeli security forces, enabled him to win the subsequent election and become prime minister - at the price of instigating the Second Intifada. This time, however, the situation seems to be different. Tampering with Hashemite custodianship of Jerusalem’s holy sites, especially Al-Aqsa Mosque, would put the region and the world on a collision course, rather than ushering in peace and coexistence. Hashemite legacy MEE reported that the plan to undermine Jordan’s custodianship of Al-Aqsa Mosque has been championed by Christian Zionists in the US, including the country’s ambassador to Israel, Mike Huckabee. A US official subsequently denied the report. Huckabee has previously said he had no problem with Israel expanding its territory from the Nile to the Euphrates - across several Arab countries, with millions of inhabitants - in total disregard of international law. Netanyahu’s “super-Sparta” vision is oblivious to the fact that Athens outlived Sparta. The Hashemites have made continuous efforts to defend Jerusalem's Muslim and Christian holy sites What Christian Zionists erroneously think is good for them, is not necessarily good for Jews or for Israel - beyond the self-serving politicians whose heads are in the sand. When talking about the custodianship of Jerusalem’s Muslim and Christian holy sites, it is important to recall the legacy of the Hashemite royal family. The Hashemites, descendants of the family of the Prophet Muhammad, have their roots in pre-Islamic Arabia. The clan of Banu Hashem carved their name into the annals of history as caretakers of the pilgrims to Mecca. The etymology of “Hashem”, which was the name of the great-grandfather of the Prophet, derives from the generous way in which they provided food for the pilgrims. This magnanimous and noble family would care for the holy sites in Mecca and Medina for a millennium. Theologically, Al-Aqsa Mosque is mentioned in the Quran as the locus of the Prophet Muhammad’s night journey, with divine blessings encompassing its precincts. In the Prophetic traditions, it is among the three holiest sites, alongside the Great Mosque of Mecca and the Prophet’s Mosque in Medina. Interfaith agreement In the year 637, the Pact of Umar, an interfaith agreement attributed to caliph Umar ibn al-Khattab and Patriarch Sophronius, was put in place to protect Christian holy places in Jerusalem and to ensure freedom of worship. During a tour of the Church of the Holy Sepulchre, Sophronius invited Umar to pray inside the church. Umar declined politely, fearing that if he prayed there, future generations of Muslims would convert the church into a mosque. Umar was conscious of the political implications of his behaviour, and he respected the limitations of hospitality, especially concerning religious spaces. US and Israel 'actively working' to strip Jordan of Al-Aqsa custodianship, sources say Read More » Before the arrival of Islam in the seventh century, Jews were prohibited from living in Jerusalem. According to the Cairo Genizah Jewish manuscripts, it was Umar who allowed Jews back into the holy city. This is consistent with the Islamic worldview: Umar witnessed it firsthand in Medina, when the Prophet Muhammad hosted a Christian delegation from Najran at his mosque. The Pact of Umar is rooted in an Islamic theology of “soft otherness” concerning the People of the Book. The Quran explicitly calls for the protection of all houses of worship: “Had Allah not repelled the aggression of some people by means of others, destruction would have surely claimed monasteries, churches, synagogues, and mosques in which Allah’s Name is often mentioned.” Fast forward to the early 20th century, when the Hashemites carried the banner of custodianship, preserving and guaranteeing the religious rights of Muslims and Christians in Jerusalem, and the integrity of their holy sites - starting with a religious pledge of allegiance to King Hussein bin Ali in 1917, and a political pledge in 1924. Sharif Hussein was buried inside the western nave of Al-Aqsa Mosque complex in 1931 at his own request. The love of the Hashemites for Al-Aqsa Mosque never waned. When King Hussein bin Talal declared Jordan’s disengagement from the occupied West Bank in 1988, he specifically excluded East Jerusalem’s holy sites and Waqf properties, thus maintaining Hashemite custodianship. This exclusion was coordinated with Yasser Arafat, then the president of the Palestine Liberation Organisation. Unwavering support Jordan’s special role was subsequently acknowledged in the 1994 peace treaty between Jordan and Israel. (adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({}); After Palestine was recognised as a non-member observer state by the UN General Assembly in 2012, Jordan’s King Abdullah II cemented the custodianship of Jerusalem’s Islamic and Christian holy sites by signing a historic agreement with Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas in Amman in March 2013. In addition to reaffirming Jordan’s custodianship over Jerusalem’s holy sites, it noted that the king had the right to exert all legal efforts to safeguard them, especially Al-Aqsa Mosque complex - an area encompassing the whole compound, including its open courtyards, an architectural feature of mosques all over the Muslim world. There was no end date to this agreement. Hashemite custodianship has unwavering support among Jordanians, who consider it a red line. It constitutes a cornerstone of national identity The Hashemites have made continuous efforts to defend Jerusalem’s Muslim and Christian holy sites. Ongoing restoration projects at Al-Aqsa Mosque and the Church of the Holy Sepulchre are funded directly by Jordan’s King Abdullah II. The Islamic Awqaf department, which is formally a part of Jordan’s Ministry of Awqaf, Islamic Affairs and Holy Places, is the largest employer in occupied East Jerusalem, and it contributes substantially to the Palestinian economic sector. The Awqaf also oversees dozens of other mosques and facilities in Jerusalem. Hashemite custodianship has unwavering support among Jordanians, who consider it a red line. It constitutes a cornerstone of the national identity. In Palestine, this arrangement won the hearts of Palestinians who refused the idea of including other Arab states in the holy site’s administration when it was floated a few years ago. Jordan’s King Abdullah II has declared unequivocally, on more than one occasion, that Al-Aqsa Mosque is neither for sharing nor division. Jordan has long emphasised the values of tolerance, moderation and stability, with the Royal Hashemite Court welcoming Christian church leaders, Muslim scholars and Awqaf officials every year during Christmas and Ramadan. Last December, Anglican Archbishop Hosam Naoum described Hashemite custodianship as a “safety valve”. The Arab and Muslim world remains united behind Jordan. The Organisation of Islamic Cooperation was established in the wake of an arson attack by an Australian Christian fundamentalist at Al-Aqsa Mosque in 1969. Today, a belligerent political arson could change the history of the region forever. The views expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Middle East Eye. Religion Opinion Post Date Override 0 Update Date Mon, 05/04/2020 - 21:29 Update Date Override 0
- Security29 May, 16:44
Jordan faces an existential choice over the defence of Al-Aqsa
Jordan faces an existential choice over the defence of Al-Aqsa Peter Oborne on Fri, 05/29/2026 - 16:41 If King Abdullah II goes to war to protect the holy site, his nation may find it has more allies than Trump and Netanyahu expect King Abdullah II visits the army command in Amman on 8 March 2026 (Jordanian Royal Palace/AFP) Off Muslims have been praying at Al-Aqsa Mosque for around 1,400 years. Israel has had its eyes on the holy site since the state’s creation in 1948, and its leaders have made increasingly aggressive attempts to seize control over the last quarter-century. In September 2000, Ariel Sharon, then Israel’s opposition leader, stormed Al-Aqsa complex with more than 1,000 police officers. The move provoked the Second Intifada. It was also the start of Israel’s creeping takeover of Al-Aqsa complex, which alongside Mecca and Medina, is among Islam’s three holiest sites. In theory and by law, the custodian of Al-Aqsa Mosque is King Abdullah II of Jordan. He is responsible for its maintenance, security, and - if need be - defence. But ever since the Sharon outrage, Israel has whittled away at Jordanian control. (adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({}); When I visited last month, Israeli security forces were everywhere, with a police station set up at the centre of the compound. Mosque workers told me they cannot repaint their offices or mend a water pipe without Israeli permission. The walls of the ancient prayer hall at the southern end of the site are pitted with bullet holes, where Israeli forces have opened fire on worshippers. According to the longstanding status-quo arrangement, which is supported by international law, this interference is not just outrageous. It is completely illegal. But worse is planned. Much worse. Dark precedent Middle East Eye reported this week that the US and Israel are conspiring to strip the Jordanian royal family of its historic custodianship. (adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({}); A US official has denied the report, but under the plan described to MEE by American, Jordanian and Palestinian officials, Israel would gain control over the appointment of imams and senior mosque officials. The plan, reportedly being pushed by US President Donald Trump’s son-in-law, Jared Kushner, and Ambassador Mike Huckabee, would also give Israel a role in approving the content of Friday sermons. The idea is based on a dark precedent: the division of the Ibrahimi Mosque in Hebron after Jewish terrorist Baruch Goldstein massacred 29 Palestinians in 1994. US and Israel 'actively working' to strip Jordan of Al-Aqsa custodianship, sources say Read More » That is no coincidence. Goldstein is one of Israeli National Security Minister Itamar Ben Gvir’s heroes. He hung a photograph of Goldstein on his living-room wall before he entered politics. Today, Ben Gvir regularly violates the status quo, forcing his way into Al-Aqsa in imitation of Sharon a quarter-century ago. Last month, he declared: “I feel like the owner here.” Successive Israeli chief rabbis have condemned Jewish activists who follow Ben Gvir’s example and pray or wave flags at the holy site. These radical groups are set on the destruction of the Dome of the Rock, the ancient Islamic shrine at the heart of Al-Aqsa complex, and its replacement by a Third Temple, which many religious Jews believe will open the way for the Messiah. Traditionally, the Shin Bet, Israel’s internal security service, has viewed their provocative incursions with alarm. Forty-two years ago, the Shin Bet narrowly thwarted a planned Jewish terror attack at Al-Aqsa complex. Ehud Yatom, one of the Shin Bet commanders who stopped the atrocity, told Israeli media in 2004 that had it gone ahead, “it would have meant the entire Muslim world against the state of Israel and against the western world, a war of religions”. He added: “With all of their pain and suffering, today’s terrorist attacks would be nothing compared to what could happen - even World War Three.” Dangerous encroachments But the Shin Bet’s approach towards this issue, under pressure from Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s extreme-right coalition government, is changing. The agency’s new chief, David Zini, is aligning the Shin Bet with Israel’s religious right. Days after he took up the post, the backgrounds on all of the agency’s computers were changed to feature a photograph of the Temple Mount, the name Jews use for Al-Aqsa complex. The move reportedly generated internal pushback, and the screens were changed back, with the agency blaming it on an “accident”. (adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({}); Thus far, Jordan’s King Abdullah has swallowed his pride at the ever more dangerous Israeli encroachments at Al-Aqsa. But will he yield again if Netanyahu gives the go-ahead to the reported Kushner/Huckabee plan? 'Below the soil of Palestine and Jerusalem are the bodies of thousands of Jordanian soldiers who paid with their blood in defence of the Holy Land' - White paper on Al-Aqsa Some of his advisers in Amman - where the CIA is well represented - will probably advise him that he has no choice, because standing up to the Israelis will only end in defeat and obliteration. They will remind him that Jordan depends on Israel for its security, as well as basic essentials such as water, in a country whose 12 million people live largely in a strip of land along the Israeli border. If Abdullah wants to stay on the throne, they might well add, Israel is a merciless and ruthless enemy. Yet, there are powerful arguments pointing Abdullah towards resistance. These are set out with great clarity in a white paper on Al-Aqsa authorised by Abdullah himself six years ago. “From the first day of the Great Arab Revolt in 1916, the Hashemite Kings have led the Arab Army in defence of the identity of Palestine, its people, and the Holy Sites of Jerusalem,” the paper notes. “Below the soil of Palestine and Jerusalem are the bodies of thousands of Jordanian soldiers who paid with their blood in defence of the Holy Land.” The white paper further highlights the role played by Abdullah’s ancestors in attempting to foil the 1917 Balfour Declaration and in defending al-Buraq Wall, also known as the Western Wall. The present king’s great-grandfather, Abdullah I, “was at the frontline of the 1936-1939 Arab uprising in opposition to the sale of Palestinian land to Jewish settlers of that period”. The white paper notes that under Hashemite custodianship, “not a single inch” of the holy complex’s 144 dunams (14 hectares) has been lost to Israel. Sacred duty Crucially, the white paper also contains a warning to any potential intruder into Al-Aqsa. It asserts on behalf of the Hashemites the sacred duty “to defend it and protect it if necessary”. This is an obligation that extends far beyond Jordan itself. The white paper states that responsibility for Al-Aqsa is “fard ayn” - an individual obligation - on “every single Muslim in the world”. Crucially, it asserts that “it is only the Custodian H.M. King Abdullah II who can call for its defence physically, and for him to determine the exact way to do that”. The white paper goes on to note that “the very permission and justification for a just war (casus belli) is given in the Holy Qur’an as the defence of religious sites (including churches and synagogues)”. In other words, Abdullah has the right to launch a religious war in defence of Al-Aqsa in the event that it is seized by Israel. Many Muslims - including many of his own subjects - would go further. They would say he has a duty to. Most experts with whom I have spoken say that Abdullah will probably content himself with a statement of protest if Israel comes for Al-Aqsa, while reluctantly acquiescing. But remember this: the king has stood up to Trump and Netanyahu before. As MEE revealed in February 2025, Abdullah sent a message to Washington and Tel Aviv that Jordan was ready to declare war on Israel if Netanyahu carried out his threat to forcibly expel Palestinians into its territory. Jordan currently secures the border, thus guaranteeing stability for Israel. That stability, it can be assumed, would vanish overnight if war broke out Abdullah was under no illusion that Jordan could defeat Israel’s vastly superior armed forces in battle. But he calculated that Israel would face an unacceptable cost if it overthrew the Hashemites. The Israeli border with Jordan stretches for 400km, almost the entire length of the country. Much of that border is mountainous terrain, and in parts all but impossible to police. A senior source with close knowledge of the security situation along the border told MEE: “The fact is that we can walk to Jerusalem tonight and get there by tomorrow.” The source added that Jordan currently secures the border, thus guaranteeing stability for Israel. That stability, it can be assumed, would vanish overnight if war broke out. Jordan, remember, has an open frontier to Israel’s east. Israel could thus face the prospect of the kind of protracted guerilla campaign that ultimately drove the US from Iraq and Afghanistan - a campaign that would certainly draw in fighters from Syria, Iraq, Saudi Arabia and beyond. Religious war Abdullah, who stands 41st in a well-documented direct line of descent from the Prophet Muhammad, will know that tensions have reached boiling point over the Israeli genocide in Gaza, alongside its atrocities in the occupied West Bank and Lebanon. This fury is felt not just by Jordan’s 2.4 million Palestinian refugees, but by the Jordanian population as a whole. It is noteworthy that two recent attacks at the Jordan/West Bank border were carried out by East Bankers. All Jordanians feel guilt for having sat by during the Israeli bombardment and dismantling of Gaza. This national guilt helps explain why Jordan’s border can pose such a threat to Israel. It will also be a factor in Abdullah’s thinking: he may conclude that resistance to Israeli predation at Al-Aqsa, whatever the risks, gives the Hashemites their best chance of survival. Why Jordan cannot be stripped of Al-Aqsa custodianship Read More » The king may also reflect that the world has changed. After Trump’s humiliation by Iran, the US is no longer the force it once was. If Abdullah goes to war for Al-Aqsa, an apparently defenceless Jordan may find it has more friends than Trump and Netanyahu expect. As Israel and the US ponder an illegal smash-and-grab raid on the third holiest site in Islam, Abdullah thus faces an existential choice: give in to Trump and Netanyahu, or fight back and risk his life and his throne. It is not just the future of the Hashemite dynasty that depends on his choice, nor only the future of the Middle East. Three years ago, I interviewed Sheikh Azzam al-Khatib, the director of the Islamic Waqf, which holds the sacred site in trust, about the Israeli threat to Al-Aqsa. He said this: “Here in Jerusalem we rely on the custodianship of King Abdullah. This place is part and parcel of Islamic theology and belief. It represents the faith of nearly two billion Muslims. King Abdullah and all Hashemites are descendants of the prophet. They will never allow Israel or anyone else to control the mosque. “God forbid if Israel changes the status quo. That would lead to a religious war that would extend far beyond Al-Aqsa.” The views expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Middle East Eye. Al-Aqsa Attack Opinion Post Date Override 0 Update Date Mon, 05/04/2020 - 21:29 Update Date Override 0
- Diplomatic29 May, 18:40
Iran says no final deal reached despite ongoing talks with US
Iran says no final deal reached despite ongoing talks with US Iran has pushed back against comments by US President Donald Trump, saying negotiations between Tehran and Washington remain under way and have yet to produce a final agreement. Esmaeil Baghaei rejected Trump's assertion that Iran “must” agree never to possess a nuclear weapon. “None of the Western parties, when speaking about the Islamic Republic of Iran, can use the language of ‘must’,” Baghaei said. “We make decisions based on the interests and rights of the Iranian people.” Baghaei also responded to Trump's remarks about lifting the US naval blockade, saying any such move would end what Tehran considers an unlawful measure. “We need to see whether in practice they will actually follow through on their words or if it’s merely a propaganda claim,” he said. On the Strait of Hormuz, Baghaei stressed that Iran and Oman must jointly determine how the strategic waterway is managed. He said the two countries should “adopt a mechanism” that safeguards their security and national interests while ensuring the continued flow of international trade.
- Security29 May, 20:59
UAE joined US-Israeli war against Iran from the outset: Report
UAE joined US-Israeli war against Iran from the outset: Report MEE staff on Fri, 05/29/2026 - 21:50 WSJ report reveals UAE carried out strikes on Iran alongside the US and Israel from the start of the war, operating as a third member of the coalition Foreign workers look at a tall plume of black smoke rising after an explosion in the Fujairah industrial zone in the UAE on 3 March 2026 (Fadel Senna/AFP) Off The United Arab Emirates carried out dozens of air strikes against Iran during the Israeli-US war, according to a report by The Wall Street Journal, revealing a far deeper and earlier role in the conflict than previously acknowledged. Citing people familiar with the matter, the newspaper said the UAE launched attacks from the opening days of the conflict and continued operations even after a ceasefire was announced in April. The report suggests Abu Dhabi effectively operated alongside the United States and Israel as a third participant in the military campaign. The strikes were reportedly coordinated with Washington and Israel, which provided intelligence support. Targets included locations on Qeshm and Abu Musa islands in the Strait of Hormuz, Bandar Abbas, the Lavan Island oil refinery and the Asaluyeh petrochemical complex. Several of the attacks hit Iranian energy infrastructure. One strike on the Asaluyeh complex, reportedly carried out in coordination with Israel, triggered international outcry and prompted Washington to urge Israel to halt attacks on energy facilities. (adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({}); Before the conflict, Gulf states publicly insisted they would not allow their territory or airspace to be used for military action against Iran. The report, however, suggests that Abu Dhabi abandoned that position at the outset of the war. Iran responded by targeting Gulf cities, airports and energy infrastructure with missiles and drones in an attempt to raise the cost of the campaign. The UAE absorbed the bulk of those attacks, with more than 2,800 missiles and drones directed at the country. Iranian opposition news site got $800m in debt relief: Report Read More » The UAE's involvement also appears to have deepened divisions among Gulf states. According to the report, Saudi Arabia privately complained to the US in early April that Emirati attacks risked drawing Iranian retaliation against regional energy facilities, potentially disrupting oil markets and threatening the global economy. Saudi officials reportedly pushed Washington to pressure Abu Dhabi to halt military operations and support diplomatic efforts instead. The conflict also exposed tensions between Gulf leaders. Gulf officials cited by the newspaper said UAE President Sheikh Mohamed bin Zayed became frustrated with Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman after Riyadh declined to join coordinated military action against Iran. The scale of retaliation has shaken the UAE’s economy, disrupting air traffic, hitting tourism revenues, and rattling its property market. Companies have announced furloughs and layoffs as the fallout spreads across key sectors. More than $120bn has been wiped from market capitalisation on the Dubai and Abu Dhabi stock exchanges up to the end of April, while over 18,400 flights have been cancelled. War on Iran News Post Date Override 0 Update Date Mon, 05/04/2020 - 21:19 Update Date Override 0
- Security30 May, 09:06
Israeli claims about an Iran 'threat' were always a lie. Now we have proof
Israeli claims about an Iran 'threat' were always a lie. Now we have proof Jonathan Cook on Fri, 05/29/2026 - 14:00 It is not Tehran led by unhinged, genocidal megalomaniacs threatening the security of the region and the world. It is Tel Aviv and Washington Former President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is pictured in Tehran on 2 June 2024 (Atta Kenare/AFP) Off Could it be that Israel’s 30-year narrative about Iran - one that persuaded US President Donald Trump to wage a criminal and disastrous war of aggression - was always a fiction, an invention cooked up in Tel Aviv? Far from Tehran posing an existential danger to Israel, as Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has claimed for decades, might Israel’s real fear be that a stronger Iran would undermine its unique leverage over Washington, threatening its status as the region’s sole - and unmonitored - nuclear power? Might large parts of the globe be facing economic meltdown simply so that Israel can remain the Middle East’s top dog - an unaccountable apartheid state committing genocide against the Palestinian people and ethnically cleansing southern Lebanon? We got a definitive answer last week, care of the New York Times. It is an uncompromising yes to all of these questions. The newspaper reported that Netanyahu not only mis-sold Trump on the idea of quick regime change in Iran following a short “shock and awe” bombing campaign. He also identified to the White House who was going to replace Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, Iran’s supreme religious leader. (adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({}); Extraordinarily, according to the Times, Netanyahu named the man for the job as former Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. The aim at the start of the air campaign was for Israel to kill Khamenei, then liberate Ahmadinejad from house arrest by striking the guards who were confining him. Presumably, Ahmadinejad was then supposed to storm the citadel and seize the keys to the palace. But only Khamenei’s assassination went according to plan. Ahmadinejad, who had reportedly been consulted on the scheme beforehand, is believed to have been injured in the Israeli strike near his home. He got cold feet, possibly suspecting he was being set up for assassination too, and went into hiding. His current whereabouts and medical condition are unknown. Ultimate bogeyman Neither US nor Israeli officials would comment to the Times on the alleged regime-change plot, a scheme that the newspaper called “audacious”. That is the understatement of all understatements. The idea that Ahmadinejad had the popular support, let alone the religious authority and military muscle behind him, to take on the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, Iran’s crack military force responsible for protecting the clerical regime, is for the birds. (adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({}); That anyone in the White House took this plan seriously, let alone acted on it, is a genuinely staggering notion. But the proposition that Ahmadinejad could retake the reins of power in Iran is possibly the least preposterous part of the scheme. Fast forward two decades, and Netanyahu reportedly now thinks Ahmadinejad is the best person to lead Iran; the person for whom it was worth killing Khamenei While younger readers may not recognise Ahmadinejad’s name, everyone else should. He made headlines on an almost weekly basis during much of his eight-year presidency, starting in 2005. Why? Because Israel turned him into the ultimate bogeyman. After neighbouring Iraq’s Saddam Hussein was toppled and executed in 2006, following an illegal invasion by the US and Britain, Ahmadinejad was hyped as the new implacable threat to regional peace. Claims about Ahmadinejad first breathed an illusory substance into Israel’s now-unchallenged script that a supposedly fanatical, deranged Iran would leave no stone unturned in seeking to destroy Israel. Ahmadinejad, we were told time and again, was seeking to pursue a nuclear bomb - even after Khamenei had issued a religious edict in 2003 strictly banning its development. In 2006, Ehud Olmert, then the Israeli prime minister, warned the world that Ahmadinejad was a “psychopath of the worst kind”, adding: “He speaks as Hitler did in his time of the extermination of the entire Jewish nation.” Olmert was echoing a panic-inducing campaign led by Netanyahu, then Israel’s opposition leader, that Iran needed to be attacked immediately to save Israel and the world. “It’s 1938 and Iran is Germany,” Netanyahu told a meeting of American Jewish leaders that same year. “And Iran is racing to arm itself with atomic bombs.” Of Ahmadinejad, he said: “Believe him and stop him … He is preparing another Holocaust for the Jewish state.” Under Ahmadinejad, Iran was supposedly hellbent on destroying Israel, turning it into a giant Auschwitz. Also in 2006, Netanyahu told Israeli Army Radio: “Israel would certainly be the first stop on Iran’s tour of destruction.” Ahmadinejad was so unhinged, Netanyahu said, that he would not stop at Israel’s eradication: “Iran is developing ballistic missiles that would reach America, and now they prepare missiles with an adequate range to cover the whole of Europe.” 'Genocidal intent' A short time later, Israel’s fear-mongering operation reached a crescendo in London. Netanyahu told members of the British parliament that Ahmadinejad had to be urgently brought before the International Criminal Court - the war crimes court in the Hague - for his “messianic apocalyptic view of the world”. (adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({}); Irony of ironies, Netanyahu - who 20 years later is a fugitive from that same court, accused of crimes against humanity for starving the people of Gaza - emphasised Ahmadinejad’s supposed genocidal intent towards Israel. From 'Baby Shah' to Bond villains, Iran war coverage has reached new heights of absurdity Read More » “In the 1930s, too, no one believed that Hitler was capable of taking action because he didn’t explicitly talk about wiping out the Jewish people,” Netanyahu told British MPs. “In contrast, the Iranian president publicly announces his intentions and no one is trying to stop him.” Michael Gove, a former Conservative cabinet minister who chaired the meeting, enthusiastically agreed, ignoring a confounding fact: that thousands of Jews have lived in Iran for centuries. Gove told the meeting that Ahmadinejad’s “rhetoric is more than worrying, but tantamount to an incitement of genocide”. Gove’s concern about genocide has not subsequently extended to Gaza. He has repeatedly denounced anyone, including legal experts and Holocaust scholars, who has noted Israel’s genocide there. In the midst of the mass slaughter in Gaza, Gove even called for the Israeli military to receive the Nobel Peace Prize. Smoke and mirrors Two decades ago, the message from Netanyahu was clear: Ahmadinejad was so rabidly antisemitic that he deserved to be compared to Hitler. Ahmadinejad was so eager to pursue a nuclear weapons programme that he was prepared to defy the country’s supreme religious leader. He was so mentally unstable that he was ready to use those weapons to exterminate Israel, even though such a move would ensure a retaliatory nuclear counter-strike on his own country. Lest we forget, Ahmadinejad had a reputation for such ruthless crackdowns on political opponents that Amnesty International noted in 2014 that his rule had “sounded the death knell for academic freedom in Iran”. Yet, fast forward two decades, and Netanyahu reportedly now thinks Ahmadinejad is the best person to lead Iran; the person for whom it was worth killing Khamenei, Iran’s most influential opponent of nuclear weapons. The New York Times reports that in recent years, there were strong suspicions inside Iran that Israel, Britain and the US were cultivating ties with Ahmadinejad and those around him - suspicions that now seem to be confirmed by Israel’s apparent regime-change plan. The newspaper further reports that Ahmadinejad had recently travelled to both Guatemala and Hungary, countries with very close ties to Israel. Does any of this make sense? And yet for western media, the fact that Netanyahu was championing Ahmadinejad as Iran’s saviour, and that the US administration wholeheartedly bought into this idea, is little more than “surprising”. In truth, it wrecks Israel’s entire narrative about Iran. It is a telling reminder of the yawning gap between what we have been told about Iran for decades, and what has actually been going on. Image and reality bear almost no resemblance to each other. This has all been smoke and mirrors. 'Wiped off the map' In my 2008 book Israel and the Clash of Civilisations, I pointed out that nothing Israel was telling us about its Middle Eastern rival could be accepted at face value - least of all Israel’s assertion that Ahmadinejad was a Jew-hating “new Hitler”. Many of the claims promoted 20 years ago by Israel about Ahmadinejad’s genocidal intent stemmed from a mistranslation of a speech in which the Iranian leader had quoted the late Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, who led the 1979 Islamic Revolution. According to western politicians and media, Ahmadinejad had called for Israel to be “wiped off the map” - widely portrayed as an ambition to launch a nuclear strike on Israel. The disinformation about Iran should have been all too glaring back in 2006, had any of it been reported properly - just as it should be now In fact, Ahmadinejad had been repeating Khomeini’s observation that Israel could not survive indefinitely in the form of an illegitimate Jewish supremacist state oppressing another people. He was pointing out that Israel’s days as a racist state were numbered, just as apartheid South Africa’s had been. The sentiment behind Khomeini’s statement should be much clearer in the present circumstances, when it is Israel, not Iran, that has been busy wiping people off the map - in Gaza and southern Lebanon. Similarly, Israel and its western allies made a great deal of noise in 2006 when Ahmadinejad called what was widely misrepresented as a “Holocaust denial” conference in Tehran. In fact, Ahmadinejad had organised what was intended to be a provocative - and to some, offensive - stunt to challenge western taboos about Israel and underscore the West’s hypocrisy towards Muslims. Ahmadinejad’s point was twofold: firstly, if Muslims are not entitled to have their beliefs and sensitivities respected by westerners - as evidenced by the 2005 “Danish cartoon affair” and the “free speech” defence for presenting caricatures of the Prophet Muhammad - why should westerners expect their own sensitivities about Israel and the Holocaust to be exempt from challenge? He also wanted to dissect the western belief that someone else, the Palestinian people, should pay a heavy price, including decades of dispossession and abuse, for the West’s crimes against Europe’s Jews. Horror show The disinformation about Iran should have been all too glaring back in 2006, had any of it been reported properly - just as it should be now, two decades later, were western journalists doing their job rather than acting as stenographers for Israel and the White House. The lies, now as then, serve the same end: to justify crushing Iran - then through sanctions, later through the addition of illegal bombing - so that Israel’s right to trample over the lives of people across the region without consequence can be protected. Iran, now refusing to release its chokehold over the Strait of Hormuz and the global supply of oil, is demanding that the price include an end to US backing for the Israeli-directed horror show in the Middle East. Trump's war on Iran is a Suez moment - but not in the way you might think Read More » Like a spoiled toddler, Trump is thrashing around - while cashing in on the volatility of the oil markets - trying to impose the old rules, when the terms of the confrontation are no longer under his exclusive control. His latest tantrum - one cooked up in Tel Aviv as much as Washington - is that most Arab states, including Iran’s neighbours in the Gulf, be forced to sign the so-called Abraham Accords with Israel. This is being presented as the framework for a regional “peace deal” involving Iran. In truth, it is the very opposite. The accords are designed to cement Israel’s status as the Middle East’s top dog, subordinating Arab states’ interests to Israel’s, and thereby isolating Iran in the region and leaving the Palestinian people and Lebanon to a genocidal Israel’s mercy. This is another swindle, like Trump’s “Board of Peace”, which dresses up US and Israeli criminal aggression and genocide as peacemaking. What the past 20 years of lies and misdirections have sought to hide is a simple fact: it is not Tehran that is led by unhinged, genocidal megalomaniacs threatening the security of the region and the world. It is Tel Aviv and Washington. Since the pair launched their criminal war of aggression against Iran three months ago, Tehran has shown restraint, acted with caution, and displayed a willingness to negotiate in good faith. Too bad there are no responsible adults on the other side with whom it can make a deal. The views expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Middle East Eye. War on Iran Opinion Post Date Override 0 Update Date Mon, 05/04/2020 - 21:29 Update Date Override 0
Okumaya devam et
ilgili gelişmeler- Ortak aktörcanlı
ABD-İran Müzakereleri Petrolü Düşürdü, Nükleer Düğüm Çözülemedi
Küresel petrol fiyatları, ABD ile İran arasında Hürmüz Boğazı'ndaki seyrüseferi yeniden başlatacak bir anlaşmaya yaklaşıldığına dair işaretlerle sert düştü. Brent petrolü yüzde 4,2 değer kaybederek 99 doların altına inerken, ABD Dışişleri Bakanı Marco Rubio 'oldukça sağlam' bir teklifin masada olduğunu belirtti. Teklif, boğazın açılmasını, sınırlı süreli nükleer müzakereleri ve bazı yaptırımların kaldırılmasını içeriyor. Ancak ABD Başkanı Trump, anlaşma tamamlanana kadar ablukanın süreceğini vurguladı. Diplomatik ilerlemeye rağmen nükleer anlaşmazlık çözüme kavuşmadı. İran'ın BM misyonu Washington'u 'yalan ve dezenformasyon' yaymakla suçlarken, Tahran ABD ile nükleer konuda şu anda herhangi bir görüşme yapılmadığını duyurdu. Uzlaşının ateşkesi uzatma ve seyrüseferi serbest bırakma üzerinde yoğunlaştığı, ancak İran'ın nükleer programına dair temel uyuşmazlığın sürdüğü bildiriliyor. AB, Hürmüz Boğazı'nda güvenliği sağlamak için daha fazla donanma gemisi gerekeceğini açıklarken, Beyaz Saray'da İran stratejisinin nihai hedefi konusunda belirsizlik devam ediyor.
282 olay40 dk önce - Ortak aktör
Trump'tan İran Anlaşması İçin Kongre Denetimi Sinyali
ABD Başkanı Donald Trump, Fransa'da Birleşik Arap Emirlikleri Devlet Başkanı Muhammed bin Zayid Al Nahyan ile yaptığı görüşme sırasında, yeni müzakere edilen İran anlaşmasını Kongre denetimine sunmaya sıcak baktığını belirtti. Salı günü yaptığı açıklamada Trump, anlaşmanın şartlarının yakından korunduğu bir dönemde, her iki partiden yasa yapıcıların detaylara erişim talebine yanıt olarak bu sinyali verdi. Anlaşmanın tam metni henüz kamuoyuyla paylaşılmazken, Kongre üyeleri inceleme yetkisi talep ediyor. Trump'ın bu hamlesi, başkanlık yetkileri ile yasama denetimi arasındaki dengeyi ve İran ile yürütülen diplomatik sürecin şeffaflığını öne çıkaran bir gelişme olarak değerlendiriliyor.
ABD17 olay22 Haz - Ortak aktör
Trump İran Nükleer Anlaşması İçin Nihai Kararını Veriyor
ABD Başkanı Donald Trump, İran'ın zenginleştirilmiş uranyum stokunun akıbetine ilişkin nihai kararını vermek üzere ulusal güvenlik ekibiyle Beyaz Saray Durum Odası'nda bir araya geldi. Trump, uranyumun ABD'ye teslim edilmesini ya da uluslararası denetimde imha edilmesini talep ederken, İran'ın nükleer silah geliştirmeyeceğini taahhüt etmesi, Hürmüz Boğazı'nın deniz trafiğine açılması ve bölgedeki mayınların temizlenmesi gibi koşulları sıraladı. İran liderinden gelen 'uranyumun ülkede kalması' yönündeki direktif ve Meclis Başkanı Galibaf'ın sert ifadeleri, müzakere sürecinde belirleyici oluyor. Rusya arabuluculuk önerirken, Kazakistan uranyuma ev sahipliği yapmaya hazır olduğunu bildirdi. İsrail Başbakanı Netanyahu'nun Trump'ı daha sert bir tutuma yönlendirme çabalarının şimdilik etkili olamadığı belirtiliyor. Türkiye Dışişleri Bakanı Fidan ise tarafların anlaşmaya yakın olduğu değerlendirmesinde bulundu. Uzmanlar, uranyum sorununun çözümünün bölgesel istikrar ve nükleer silahlanmanın önlenmesi bakımından hayati önem taşıdığına işaret ediyor.
165 olay19 Haz - Ortak aktör
Trump says Xi agrees Iran must not obtain nuclear weapon
İran1 olay16 May - Ortak aktör
Gulf states talk Trump out of Iran strikes in a show of regional influence
İran3 olay20 May - Ortak aktör
ABD-İran Anlaşma Taslağı İsrail’i Kaygılandırıyor: Hürmüz Boğazı ve Abraham Anlaşmaları Pazarlıkta
ABD ile İran arasında Hürmüz Boğazı’nın yeniden açılması ve deniz ablukasının kaldırılması karşılığında Washington’un askerî varlığını çekmesini öngören bir mutabakat zaptı taslağı, İsrail’de rahatsızlık yarattı. Mayıs 2026 sonunda İran devlet televizyonunun duyurduğu taslak, 60 günlük ateşkesle başlayacak ve İran’ın ticari geçişleri eski hâline getirmesiyle ABD güçlerinin bölgeden uzaklaştırılmasını içeriyor. Ancak Başkan Trump yaptırımların hafifletilmeyeceğini vurgularken, İran ise uranyum ve Hürmüz’den geçiş ücreti alınmaması gibi ek talepleri reddetti. Görüşmeler Pakistanlı arabulucular aracılığıyla sürüyor ve taraflar henüz kilit meselelerde anlaşmaya varmadı. İsrail, anlaşmayı “başarısızlık” olarak nitelendirirken, Washington’daki etkisinin azaldığını savunuyor. Trump’ın İran ile müzakerelere Abraham Anlaşmaları’na uyum şartını eklemesi, Arap müttefiklerinin pozisyonuyla örtüşmediği gerekçesiyle eleştiriliyor. Öte yandan ABD ve İsrail’in Ürdün’ün Mescid-i Aksa’daki vesayetini hedef aldığı iddiaları da diplomatik gerilimi tırmandırıyor. Bu süreçte taraflar arasında askerî çatışmalar yaşandı; Washington Hürmüz Boğazı üzerinde beş İran İHA’sını düşürdüğünü, Tahran ise Kuveyt’teki ABD üssüne balistik füze saldırısı düzenlediğini bildirdi. Anlaşma, küresel petrol arzı açısından kritik olan Hürmüz Boğazı’ndaki tıkanıklığı giderme potansiyeli taşırken, İsrail’in güvenlik kaygıları ve bölgesel normalleşme çabalarını yeniden şekillendiriyor. Trump yönetimi diplomatik çözümü askerî seçeneğe tercih ettiğini belirtse de, Pakistan’ın Abraham Anlaşmaları’na katılma ihtimalinin düşük olması ve İran’ın tutumu müzakerelerin geleceğini belirsiz kılıyor.
ABD24 olay07 Haz