TEHRAN – Prominent Palestinian analyst and editor-in-chief of Rai Al-Youm, Abdel Bari Atwan, has argued that Iran’s strategic leverage and military deterrence played a decisive role in shaping recent developments surrounding a potential agreement between Tehran and Washington.

In an editorial, Atwan revealed that US President Donald Trump ultimately concluded that victory against Iran was unattainable after more than 100 days of conflict triggered by 'Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s efforts to draw the United States into war.' According to Atwan, the growing risk of failure outweighed any prospect of success, prompting Washington to seek a political settlement.

He asserted that the proposed framework under discussion would pave the way for a ceasefire, prevent the expansion of a broader regional war of attrition, and recognize Iran’s and Oman’s authority over the Strait of Hormuz. Atwan argued that such developments reflect strategic realities that Washington can no longer ignore.

The veteran commentator further contended that Trump had been misled by Netanyahu regarding the prospects of the conflict and is now compelled to negotiate with the Islamic Republic—an outcome that contrasts with the original objectives of the war.

He also suggested that any ceasefire arrangement would need to encompass multiple regional fronts, including Lebanon, in line with Tehran’s position.

According to Atwan, postponing decisions on contentious issues, particularly Iran’s nuclear program, and referring them to future negotiations, alongside the gradual easing of sanctions and the release of frozen Iranian assets, would represent significant gains for Tehran. He attributed these developments to 'Iran’s calculated diplomacy,' coupled with its ability to establish credible military deterrence against potential US or Israeli action in and around the Strait of Hormuz.

Atwan noted that Iran had spent a few years negotiating with the United States and European countries over its nuclear program without making concessions on key issues, including uranium enrichment. He argued that Tehran entered the confrontation with several strategic advantages, including its nuclear capabilities, indigenous missile and drone programs, and the unity of regional resistance fronts.

Concluding his analysis, Atwan maintained that regardless of the ultimate fate of any agreement, the conflict had exposed strategic miscalculations by Washington and Tel Aviv. He argued that future political developments, including upcoming US elections, would provide a clearer assessment of the consequences of those decisions.