00:00When we look at it, both sides are still holding this maximum-less position, as you just said.
00:05And Iran's supreme leader has emphasized that they will not give up its nuclear or missile programs.
00:12Trump's stance is on compromising, repeatedly saying Iran cannot have a nuclear weapon,
00:18as you were just talking to me about how wide this gap is between both sides.
00:23Could these fundamentally different positions lead to military escalation, as they do try to find a way to end this
00:32stalemate?
00:35First of all, I have to confess one thing.
00:37American side insists on a correct thing.
00:41It's what 60% enrichment is more than having a peaceful nuclear program.
00:47So a reduction in enrichment is a must, especially to accept and resolution.
00:52On the other hand, if both parties fail negotiating or sometimes agreeing on something,
00:58because it requires a step back from the original demands,
01:01then military escalation will turn out to be something different than we expect.
01:06Why?
01:07There's a new pattern of military confrontations, and the U.S. started this intervention on Iran in a wrong way.
01:17It's what it was too conventional.
01:19But today, we have asymmetric, irregular, hybrid phases of warfare.
01:25And I believe that right after this point, if there's no agreement,
01:29we will witness the asymmetric way of, you know, pushing each other will be on the agenda for both parties.
01:39And Iran has already started it by closing Hormuz or striking the Gulf countries.
01:45And the U.S. has started applying, you know, sanctions or embargo.
01:51But I think that methodology of new war types will be valid, like asymmetric ones.
01:59Yes.
02:02But thank you for conceptual humorful production!
Comments