Gregg Carlstrom

this year.

So they think the Americans are entirely bad faith actors.

And then that's also a longstanding view on the American side.

For decades now, there's been a reluctance to negotiate with Iran and a feeling that it's pointless to negotiate with Iran.

So they both have their doubts, but at the same time, they both have an economic incentive, if nothing else, to

try and negotiate right now.

America needs the Strait of Hormuz open to try and bring down global energy prices.

Iran needs it open to lift this American blockade that is causing economic damage for them.

So that will push them, I think, towards at least some sort of a short-term agreement that might reopen the Strait temporarily, that might use some of that economic pressure.

I think

The bigger concern is what happens if they reach the interim deal that they're talking about now?

They buy a bit more time, they negotiate for a few months over a final agreement, and they just can't resolve the substantive disputes between their two sides to get to a final deal.

Do we then end up in a position where, you know, great, we've extended the ceasefire by a few months, but it all falls apart later this summer or in the autumn?

I think on some parts of the nuclear issue, they are closer.

If you go back to the two previous rounds of negotiations before the war between America and Iran,

The American position was pretty clear.

They wanted Iran to renounce any uranium enrichment entirely.

Iran was not allowed to enrich anything.

And the Iranians insisted that they would never give up on what they see as their inalienable right to enrich uranium.

Where we're at right now is they seem to have converged on the idea of a time-bound moratorium on enrichment.