logo

Trump's new two-week negotiating window sets off scramble to restart stalled Iran talks

CNN5 hours ago

Source: CNN
President Donald Trump's decision to open a two-week negotiating window before deciding on striking Iran sets off an urgent effort to restart talks that had been deadlocked when Israel began its bombing campaign last week.
The hope among Trump and his advisers is that Iran — under constant Israeli attack and having suffered losses to its missile arsenal — will relent on its hardline position and agree to terms it had previously rejected, including abandoning its enrichment of uranium, according to US officials .
The deferred decision, which came after days of increasingly martial messages from the president suggesting he was preparing to order a strike, also gives Trump more time to weigh the potential consequences — including the chance it could drag the United States into the type of foreign conflict he promised to avoid.
But negotiating a diplomatic solution in Trump's condensed timeline appeared to face significant early hurdles.
Earlier this week, discussions were underway inside the White House to dispatch Middle East envoy Steve Witkoff and Vice President JD Vance to the region for talks with Iran. But as Trump grew wary that diplomatic efforts might succeed, the idea never resulted in scheduled talks, and both Vance and Witkoff remained in Washington as of Thursday.
Foreign ministers from Britain, Germany and France are traveling to Geneva on Friday to hold talks with Iranian representatives, and have been briefed on the details of the last deal Witkoff offered to Iran, which Tehran ultimately rejected before the Israeli strikes began. Among US officials, there were not high expectations of success for Friday's meeting in Geneva, one US official said. But a White House official kept the door open to progress.
'This is a meeting between European leaders and Iran. The President supports diplomatic efforts from our allies that could bring Iran closer to taking his deal,' a White House official said.
Iran's consistent message to the US since Israel began its strikes a week ago has been they will not engage in further talks with the US until the ongoing Israeli operation ends, two sources familiar with the messages said.
The US has so far not pressured Israel to halt its strikes, sources said. And Trump said this week that his message to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has been to 'keep going.'
So far, Iran has offered no indication it is willing to move off its positions on enrichment, which it views as a red line. And as of Thursday, no official talks between the US and Iran were on the books, US officials said.
In putting off a decision, Trump appears to be placing more stock in a diplomatic solution that only a day earlier he appeared to suggest was out of reach.
'I think the president has made it clear he always wants to pursue diplomacy. But believe me, the president is unafraid to use strength if necessary,' press secretary Karoline Leavitt said Thursday after relaying Trump's new two-week timeline. 'And Iran and the entire world should know that the United States military is the strongest and most lethal fighting force in the world, and we have capabilities that no other country on this planet possesses.'
In a string of Situation Room meetings over the course of this week, Trump has quizzed advisers about the likelihood US bunker-buster bombs could entirely eliminate Iran's underground nuclear facility at Fordow, and how long such an operation might last, according to people familiar with the conversations.
He has insisted repeatedly he wants to avoid taking action that could devolve into a multi-year conflict, something many of his own loyalists — including his onetime top strategist Steve Bannon, with whom the president had lunch Thursday — argue would be unavoidable should he make the decision to go ahead.
And while the president has seen the military options, he remains worried about a longer-term war. Any assessments on whether a strike would cause prolonged US engagement are predictive and, by their nature, not entirely satisfactory, one official said.
The new, within-two-weeks time frame for talks was not universally welcomed. An Israeli intelligence official expressed dismay that Trump would not make a decision – one way or the other.
'This is not helping,' the official said.
Trump will continue to convene top-level intelligence briefings over the coming days, returning to Washington early from a weekend trip to his property in New Jersey to be updated at the White House.
He has relied principally on his CIA Director John Ratcliffe and Joint Chiefs Chairman Gen. Dan Caine in meetings to discuss his options, according to people familiar with the matter.
But at the center of the diplomatic efforts will be Witkoff, the president's friend and foreign envoy who has led negotiations meant to curb Tehran's nuclear ambitions. Witkoff began direct messaging with his Iranian counterpart, Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi, earlier this month and the administration has maintained some communications with Iranian officials over the past tense days as Trump weighed a strike.
The plan that Witkoff last offered to Tehran would have required Iran to eventually end all uranium enrichment on its soil, and on Thursday the White House said it still views a ban on Iranian uranium enrichment as necessary to a final deal.
As the Europeans head into Friday's meeting, they will be 'taking the temperature' on how receptive the Iranians are to finding a diplomatic solution, given their belief that strikes in both directions are not a solution, a European official said.
European leaders believe the risks of Iran's nuclear program persist even amid Israel's strikes because Tehran maintains nuclear know-how and may still have clandestine nuclear-related efforts that won't get demolished by military strikes.
Meanwhile, most US diplomats who are not in Trump's inner circle at the State Department have not been given specific guidance to offer US allies on the diplomatic efforts, a US official and a European diplomat said.
That has led to many frustrating discussions with foreign interlocutors as US diplomats have very few answers to give the allies as they try to determine their diplomatic and military posture in the region, pointing only to Trump's own words.
As Trump has weighed his options, Secretary of State Rubio has been close by, also departing early from the Group of 7 summit in Canada along with the commander in chief earlier this week.
The top US diplomat spoke on Monday with his French, British and European Union counterparts about efforts to 'encourage a diplomatic path that ensures Iran never develops a nuclear weapon,' according to State Department readouts of the calls.
On Wednesday, Rubio 'compared notes' on the matter with the Norwegian foreign minister. Rubio met with British Foreign Secretary David Lammy on Thursday before Lammy departs for the Geneva talks, and the two 'agreed Iran can never develop or acquire a nuclear weapon,' according to the State Department.
'Meeting with Secretary of State Rubio and Special Envoy to the Middle East Witkoff in the White House today, we discussed how Iran must make a deal to avoid a deepening conflict. A window now exists within the next two weeks to achieve a diplomatic solution,' Lammy said in a statement Thursday.
US officials, including Witkoff, have also been actively engaged with officials in the region, many of whom have offered their help in mediating a diplomatic path forward. Multiple sources said Iran has responded to messages from third parties, but their responses have not changed.
See Full Web Article

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Murkowski says she has been "pretty clear" about her concerns with Trump's "big, beautiful bill"
Murkowski says she has been "pretty clear" about her concerns with Trump's "big, beautiful bill"

CBS News

time17 minutes ago

  • CBS News

Murkowski says she has been "pretty clear" about her concerns with Trump's "big, beautiful bill"

Republican Sen. Lisa Murkowski says she has been "pretty clear" about her concerns over potential cuts President Trump's so-called "big, beautiful bill" would make to Medicaid and food benefits for her constituents in Alaska. In an interview for "CBS Sunday Morning," Murkowski told CBS News senior correspondent Norah O'Donnell that she hasn't given any absolute deal-breakers in the Senate legislation — but she's voiced her reservations about the Medicaid proposals. "I have not given anybody in the administration an absolute, this is my red line, right?" Because I think it's important that every step of the way, I communicate where my concerns are," Murkowski told O'Donnell in the interview airing this weekend. The reconciliation bill — or "one big, beautiful bill," as Mr. Trump and Republicans in Congress have dubbed it — has passed the House, but remains up for debate in the Senate, where some Republicans are pushing for deeper cuts to Medicaid than the House-passed version allows. Medicaid is the entitlement program that offers government-backed health care for both low-income Americans and those with disabilities, with the federal government and states splitting the costs. While the House version adds a new work requirement to Medicaid for childless adults, the Senate wants work requirements to expand to parents of older children. The Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP, provides food benefits to the poorest Americans, and some Senate Republicans are hoping to place more requirements on states. "So I've been pretty clear that when it comes to Medicaid, those cuts that would harm Alaskan beneficiaries, that's not something that I can take home, right? We have some of the highest health care costs in the country. We have 40% of Alaska's kids that are on Medicaid. I want to try to do what we can to address certain aspects of our entitlement spending. We've got to do that. But doing it with the most vulnerable bearing the brunt of that is not the answer," she said. Senate Majority Leader John Thune, a Republican from North Dakota, wants the reconciliation bill to pass by the July 4 holiday, but that deadline is quickly approaching. Watch more of the interview with Sen. Lisa Murkowski on "CBS Sunday Morning" on Sunday, June 22.

New rule-busting text circulating for Republican megabill
New rule-busting text circulating for Republican megabill

E&E News

time18 minutes ago

  • E&E News

New rule-busting text circulating for Republican megabill

New language being floated for the Republicans' megabill would halt proposed federal regulations that generate financial impacts not explicitly authorized by Congress. Text obtained by POLITICO's E&E News that is currently under review by the Budget Committee would authorize the White House to review all proposed agency rules with 'a non-negligible budgetary effect.' Rules that would spend more than $100 million, and are not directly tied to a law authorizing such spending, would be cut. The text, which could be added to the budget reconciliation bill through an amendment or another procedure, is reminiscent of the 'Regulations from the Executive in Need of Scrutiny (REINS) Act,' which would give Congress final say over all major federal rules. Advertisement Energy and Natural Resources Chair Mike Lee (R-Utah) has been working on what he calls 'REINS-lite,' a version of the legislation intended to be more budgetary so it conforms with reconciliation rules.

Letting Transgender Kids Play Sports Benefits All Kids
Letting Transgender Kids Play Sports Benefits All Kids

Yahoo

time21 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Letting Transgender Kids Play Sports Benefits All Kids

Credit - Marc Elias—Getty Images President Donald Trump's raft of anti-LGBTQ+ executive orders affects many aspects of the lives of LGBTQ+ people, including their sports participation, access to healthcare, and ability to serve in the military. Advertisement One executive order seeking to ban transgender athletes from participating in girls' and women's sports, is surprisingly picking up some Democratic support. Recently, Senator Ruben Gallego, a Democrat from Arizona said banning trans students from girls' and women's school sports might be 'legitimate' and argued that trans girls put cisgender girls at risk during sporting events. However, this is a damaging myth that fuels anti-trans stigma, harassment, intimidation, and discrimination and reinforces misogynistic stereotypes that girls are weak and need protection. It's not the first time a Democrat has capitulated to Republican anti-trans messaging. In Oct. 2024, during his long-shot attempt to unseat Senator Ted Cruz in Texas, Democrat Colin Allred released a campaign ad in which he seemed to oppose the participation of trans girls in sports. And in March 2025, California Governor Gavin Newsom, speaking on the first episode of his new podcast 'This Is Gavin Newsom,' said it was 'deeply unfair' for trans athletes to participate in women's sports. We are not totally naïve—we get why a handful of Democrats are joining Republicans in wanting to ban trans kids from participating in sports teams consistent with their gender identities. These democratic legislators likely think their stance will appeal to 'centrist' voters; recent public polling suggests that about two-thirds of U.S. adults support such bans. But we still firmly believe that such bans are misguided, harmful, and built on falsehoods, perpetuating harmful stereotypes and inequities. Democrats should not be willing to throw transgender kids under the bus just for electoral considerations. Trans kids face higher rates of multiple physical and mental health difficulties than their cis peers—largely due to how our society treats the transgender community. But when they're allowed to play sports, these rates fall. What's more, states with policies allowing trans girls to play sports have seen increased rates of sports participation by cis girls. In other words, letting trans girls play sports benefits all girls. Shouldn't politicians be championing the benefits of sport for all? Advertisement To understand why such bans are damaging, let's back up and consider the lives of trans youth. A study by the Williams Institute at UCLA School of Law estimates that there are about 300,100 trans kids (ages 13-17) in the U.S., making up just 1.4% of all youth in that age range. The Center for American Progress notes that trans youth face 'high rates of family rejection, violence, discrimination, and suicidality.' Suicidality is shockingly common: the Centers for Disease Control conducts a national survey of high school students every two years to explore health-related behaviors, called the Youth Risk Behavior Survey (YRBS), and the 2023 survey found that 53.8% of trans youth had seriously considered suicide, compared to 20.4% of the general youth population. Research has shown that trans kids are also at increased risk of depression, anxiety, substance misuse, and impaired quality of life. The good news is that sports can be a real lifeline. The research is clear: when trans youth are allowed to participate in sports, these mental health risks fall. For example, trans students in states with fully inclusive athletics policies are less likely to have considered suicide than students in states without such policies. Megan Bartlett, founder of the Chicago-based non-profit The Center for Healing and Justice Through Sport, told The Guardian that sports 'can be life-saving—especially for marginalized young people – because it can actually change your brain.' When kids are in sports teams, she said, the positive relationships help make them 'feel safe and practice being stressed but being able to deal with that stress,' which builds lifelong resilience. Trans kids at inclusive schools are also less likely to experience harassment and victimization. For all adolescents, participating in a sports team can reduce anxiety, depression, and feelings of loneliness. Letting trans kids play sports also improves their physical health. Trans kids have worse physical health than their peers—including higher rates of obesity and of risk factors for cardiovascular disease, like abnormal cholesterol levels—which are thought to be due to the stress of marginalization. But research has shown that playing sports lowers their risk of obesity and improves their cardiovascular health. The benefits go even further. Trans kids who are allowed to play sports in accordance with their gender identity are more likely to feel like they belong at school and more accepted by their peers. Sports help all kids gain skills in team building, management skills, commitment, and leadership. And there's even evidence that LGBTQ student athletes have higher grade point averages than those who do not play sports. Advertisement Unfortunately, several myths about trans student athletes are being promoted by supporters of school sports bans. We believe these need to be challenged. The first myth, pushed by Senator Gallego, is that anti-trans sports bans are needed to protect cisgender girls. There is no evidence that trans-inclusive policies are harmful to cis girls; indeed, trans boys and girls have been openly participating in high school sports for many years now, with no documented evidence of any harm to cis kids. States that have adopted inclusive policies have seen steady or increasing rates of participation by all youth. For example, California and Connecticut, which have allowed trans kids to play sports on the team of their choice, have seen participation of all girls increase. For instance in California, participation among girls in sports has increased by almost 14% from 2014 to 2020. The second myth, peddled by Governor Newsom, is that trans kids have an unfair advantage in sports. Trans kids vary enormously in their sporting ability, just like cis kids. Some play well and some play poorly, just like cis kids. Trans kids are all different heights, sizes, and strengths, just like cis kids. Whether any kid excels at sport is most often related to factors like how hard they train and what kind of access they have to good coaches. As the ACLU argues, when a trans kid does well at sport, they should be 'celebrated for their hard work, not demonized because of who they are.' Other myths abound. For instance, some conservative politicians and organizations push the fiction that massive numbers of trans kids are now 'dominating' high school sports. In reality, one study using CDC data found that only 40.7% of trans kids in grades nine through 12 played on at least one sports team. If we apply this percentage to the 300,100 trans kids aged 13-17 in the U.S., only 122,000 trans kids are playing sports out of a total of about 21 million kids in this age rage. This means that trans kids make up an extremely tiny fraction of those in sport. Advertisement Another false narrative claims that inclusive policies change the nature of girls' sports. But as the ACLU notes, that trans girls' 'participation in the girls' category does not change the nature of the category.' Inclusive policies do not undermine Title IX protections, and girls' sports have thrived in states that adopted such policies. This is why many women's rights advocacy groups support inclusion of trans people in sports. Trans kids just want the same opportunities as their peers. They want to be on sports teams to have fun, get exercise, and hang out with their friends. Just like any other kid. When we deny them that right, we are actively causing harm that could easily be avoided. And, in the end, this discriminatory behavior hurts us all. Contact us at letters@

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store