Mike Baker

There is no scenario where Iran is allowed to retain a pathway to a nuclear weapon, and that includes domestic uranium enrichment.

So right away, you've got a fundamental gap, a very sizable fundamental gap between where Iran is starting and where Washington says it's willing to end up.

Fourth, they're demanding the rolling back of international pressure.

Iran wants the removal of UN sanctions, as well as an end to ongoing investigations by the International Atomic Energy Agency into its past nuclear activity.

That would effectively clear the slate internationally, something the US and its European allies have been reluctant to do without full transparency.

And there has never been full transparency when it comes to the Iranian nuclear program.

That old adage, trust but verify, well, that only works if you can fully verify.

Up to now, it's been trust but verify whatever the Iranians are willing to show you.

Fifth, they're demanding security guarantees.

Tehran is looking for assurances that it won't face future military action, potentially backed by outside powers.

Now, that raises big questions about enforcement of that and whether any third party would realistically take on that role.

And then there are the demands that, at least for now, appear to be perhaps negotiable.

Things like financial compensation for war damage and a full withdrawal of U.S.

forces from the region.

Those positions Iran has historically pushed, but they may already be walking back as talks approach.

And finally, there's the issue of scope.

Iran's proposal includes ceasefires across all fronts, including against their key terror proxy, Hezbollah in Lebanon.

But Washington has made clear that's not part of the current agreement.

And as we've seen over the past several days, well, Israel certainly isn't on board with that idea.

Now, there's another layer to this that I'd be remiss to not mention, because as you know, well, I'm a bit of a cynic here.