🔺 Iran confirms it has received ceasefire proposals from mediators Iran has received proposals from mediators aimed at halting its war with the United States, Foreign Ministry spokesman Esmaeil Baghaei said Monday, without giving details. “Ideas have been conveyed to us by certain mediators,” Baghaei told reporters in Tehran, adding that Iran “will spare no effort to stop US crimes.” He said diplomacy was operating alongside the military response. Qatari mediators passed Tehran a proposal for a 10-day ceasefire that would require Iran to halt its attacks on shipping and permit traffic through the Strait of Hormuz, in exchange for a pause in U.S. strikes, according to Reuters. A senior Iranian source said the 10 days would be used to find ways to revive the interim deal signed last month. Asked directly about the Qatari proposal, Baghaei declined to address the specifics. He also said Iran had never been the first to breach the Islamabad memorandum, describing its position as “commitment for commitment.”

🎥 Crisis Group’s Ali Vaez asked why Iran would “sacrifice” a supposedly generous U.S. deal over control of the Strait of Hormuz, including a southern corridor handling at best 20% of traffic. Vali Nasr rejected the premise, arguing Tehran concluded early that Washington never intended to honor the MOU and was using it to catch its breath before another war. Nasr said Iran had expected another Israeli/U.S. round by October. Instead, it came much sooner. He identified four signals that convinced Tehran the MOU was never going to be implemented: 1️⃣ No money arrived. No frozen Iranian funds were released. Nasr said one person told him that if chief negotiator Qalibaf had returned from Doha with even $1 billion, “the conversation in Iran would have been very different.” Two months of oil waivers do little to change Iran’s economic position. 2️⃣ Lebanon showed Tehran the U.S. would not honor what it signed. Nasr said Washington agreed to provisions on Lebanon in the MOU, then almost immediately helped create conditions for Israel to operate there with the Lebanese government’s approval, effectively stripping Iran of leverage. 3️⃣ The U.S. began rebuilding for war immediately after signing. Military assets poured into the region in a pattern Tehran recognized from the buildup before February. Nasr said the rhetoric around diplomacy was simply not matched by what Iran was seeing militarily. 4️⃣ Washington began “whittling down” Iran’s control of Hormuz. Nasr stressed two separate moves: the U.S. encouraged tankers not to coordinate with Iran at all, then pushed them toward the southern channel. Iran drew the line. Washington responded with a massive escalation, targeting missile and drone batteries in an effort to take control of the strait out of its hands. 🔸Vali Nasr’s key point: Iran does not see this as a choice between economic benefits and Hormuz. In Tehran’s view, there were no economic benefits to “sacrifice” because Washington was never going to deliver them. And without control of Hormuz, Iran believes it has no leverage to force the U.S. to implement any future deal. As Nasr put it, control of the strait gives Iran a “sword of Damocles over the head of the global economy” that Tehran sees as “essential” to getting anything from Washington. @vali_nasr | @CrisisGroup

NYT: Iranian missile strikes damaged a “significant number” of U.S. Black Hawk helicopters at Prince Hassan Air Base in eastern Jordan.