2026-06-18T04:00:25.409Z / https://www.cnn.com/2026/06/18/politics/trump-iran-deal
- 总统唐纳德·特朗普签署了一项结束伊朗战争的协议，理由是担心经济灾难和股市动荡。
- 批评人士警告称，该协议几乎放弃了美国所有的影响力，并在关键核谈判前向伊朗解除了数十亿美元的制裁。
- 特朗普承认经济成本是推动其做出该决定的因素，这可能向对手发出信号，让他们认为可以对华盛顿使用类似的施压策略。
AI生成的摘要经CNN编辑审核。
唐纳德·特朗普上个月曾坚称，在与伊朗谈判时他不会考虑美国人的财务状况。
显然他已经改变了主意。
“我不想看到经济灾难。如果继续打下去，这可能真的会发生，”特朗普周三在为这项被批评人士视为存在严重缺陷的结束战争协议辩解时说道。
特朗普在法国发表的这番言论是一个颇具启示性的时刻。它表明，在政治压力下，特朗普往往会寻求短期优势，而非长期的战略博弈。同时这也凸显出他对市场智慧的推崇，他称市场“比除我之外的任何顾问都要‘高明’”。
但特朗普支持的这项和平协议遭到了一位共和党参议员的警告，称其会让罗纳德·里根“在九泉之下不得安宁”。该协议可能会削弱美国在为期60天、或将决定伊朗核命运的关键谈判中的立场。
这项旨在为后续会谈铺平道路的协议，似乎几乎放弃了美国所有的影响力，还通过解除制裁 upfront（预先）向伊朗输送了数十亿美元的收入。这可能会打击特朗普自封的“全球顶级交易大师”的神秘形象——正是这一形象将他从真人秀明星推上了白宫宝座。
那他为什么要这么做？
几周来，特朗普一直试图通过轰炸迫使伊朗屈服。他曾发出毁灭性威胁，要摧毁伊朗这个文明国家。当外交陷入僵局时，他于上周下令美国轰炸机和导弹重新升空。
但在他意识到战争代价后，他可能终于找到了自2月发动冲突以来一直在寻找的脱身之道。
有时，在一片嘈杂的言论中，特朗普会展现出总统罕见的坦率。
周三七国集团峰会结束后，他透露自己曾研究过，每当他谈到可能与伊朗实现和平时，股市就会“像火箭一样飙升”，而当有关协议破裂的头条新闻传出时，股市就会“大幅下跌”。
“我最不想成为的就是已故的伟大赫伯特·胡佛，”他说道，这里指的是这位20世纪的美国总统因导致大萧条而遭指责，那场危机让投资者血本无归，数百万美国人陷入赤贫。
伊朗战争带来的反弹并没有那么极端，美国经济依然强劲。但战争推高了汽油价格，加剧了通货膨胀，其后果显然会迅速恶化。
与此同时，特朗普的支持率已跌至30%出头，战争带来的经济影响让他看起来更像是对许多选民苦苦挣扎的经济负担无动于衷——他周三再次抨击这是民主党人的抹黑运动。
特朗普结束战争的理由在很多方面都耐人寻味。
这会让批评人士更加坚信，这位总统关于这场战争的各种言论——尤其是在本周早些时候——往往是为了在股市引发反应、压低油价。
更严重的是，他的承认似乎印证了伊朗的战略判断：在美国和以色列最初的空中打击陷入僵局后，美国人无法承受这场冲突的代价。这意味着德黑兰的新王牌——通过封锁霍尔木兹海峡切断石油出口的能力——变得更加强大了。
特朗普周三警告称，如果伊朗不履行协议条款，他将“用炸弹轰炸他们”。但持续数周的猛烈空袭并没有实现政权更迭，也没有迫使伊朗伊斯兰共和国达成有利于华盛顿的协议。因此，伊朗可能会合乎逻辑地得出结论：特朗普不会为了实现其要求而冒着股市暴跌和油价上涨的风险。而再次轰炸伊朗的威胁似乎也违反了谅解备忘录（MOU）的第一条条款，该条款禁止美国“使用或威胁使用武力反对对方”。
在冲突早期，特朗普似乎还在意共和党参议员的批评，他们担心他对伊朗过于软弱。但随着谅解备忘录的签署，他将更难反悔或修改协议条款。
问题不在于特朗普结束战争是错误的。如果战斗现在停止，许多美国人和伊朗人的生命可能得以挽救。而经济影响的缓解也将切实改善许多美国工薪阶层的生活。
但一些共和党人对此大加批评，其中包括前副总统迈克·彭斯，他周二告诉CNN的凯特兰·柯林斯，即将达成的协议感觉像是“绥靖政策”。
通过付出如此高昂的代价来停止战斗，特朗普实际上不仅向伊朗，也向其他对手传递了一个信息：如果对手通过经济战争制造政治压力，华盛顿在军事冲突中的决心就会被削弱。
他似乎也背弃了伊朗人民——他在战争开始时曾向他们保证，这场战争是他们“几代人以来”推翻残暴政府的唯一机会。在向德黑兰做出的重大让步中，这份谅解备忘录承诺美国和伊朗都“不干涉彼此的内政”。
特朗普可能不仅束缚了自己的手脚，也束缚了继任者的手脚。
特朗普周三在法国七国集团峰会结束后坚称，该协议将结束冲突，重新开放霍尔木兹海峡。他押下重注，相信伊朗此前的承诺——不会寻求核武器——但伊朗此前曾将铀浓缩至接近武器级水平，这一承诺此前已被打破。
他还辩称，应该从他的两届任期整体来评判他的伊朗政策。他声称，2020年1月在巴格达暗杀伊朗安全部长卡西姆·苏莱曼尼的决定改变了历史。他还称，去年美国对伊朗核设施的轰炸行动已经消除了伊朗拥有核弹的威胁。
总统关于其此前伊朗政策的战略影响的看法不无道理。但如果他已经解决了这个问题，那他为什么又发动了一场新的战争？
而且这已经不是特朗普第一次在冗长的新闻发布会上对伊朗的说法语无伦次了。最令人困惑的是，他此前曾要求伊朗“无条件投降”，现在却暗示德黑兰有权像其地区对手一样拥有导弹项目。
他还向伊朗释放了更多善意，称他不认为60天的时间表是“硬性截止日期”。
另一个离奇的转折是，特朗普在凡尔赛宫签署了一份谅解备忘录副本，并将照片发给了伊朗方面。
“已经签署了，”特朗普说，“在凡尔赛宫签的，我刚签完。”
他这种作秀式的举动只会强化一种观感：他认为协议的表面效果至少和协议内容本身一样重要。
这也引出了一个问题：如果签署的谅解备忘录没有迎来所有人期待的更深入的外交，反而被特朗普视为确立了一种新的现状，让他能够全身而退，彻底摆脱整个伊朗冒险行动，那会怎么样？
Trump’s Iran agreement may be a dud, but he’s getting what he wants
2026-06-18T04:00:25.409Z / https://www.cnn.com/2026/06/18/politics/trump-iran-deal
- President Donald Trump signed an agreement to end the Iran war, citing fears of economic catastrophe and stock market turmoil.
- Critics warn the agreement cedes nearly all US leverage and grants Iran billions in sanctions relief before key nuclear talks.
- Trump’s admission that economic costs drove his decision may signal to adversaries they can use similar pressure tactics against Washington.
AI-generated summary was reviewed by a CNN editor.
Donald Trump insisted last month that he didn’t think about Americans’ finances when negotiating with Iran.
He’s clearly changed his mind.
“I didn’t want to see economic catastrophe. If you kept this going, that could have happened,” Trump said Wednesday, in seeking to explain what critics see as a deeply flawed agreement to end the war.
Trump’s comment, in France, was a revealing moment. It shows how, under political pressure, he often grasps for short-term advantage over the long-term strategic grind. And it underscores his reverence for the wisdom of the markets, which he said were “more brilliant” than any of his advisers “other than me, of course.”
But Trump’s embrace of a peace plan that one Republican senator warned had Ronald Reagan “rolling over in his grave” risks weakening the US position going into critical 60-day talks that could define Iran’s nuclear destiny.
The agreement, designed to pave the way to those meetings, seems to cede almost all US leverage and hands Iran billions of dollars in revenues up front by waiving sanctions. It may therefore dent Trump’s self-conjured mystique as the world’s great dealmaker — which lifted him from reality TV to the White House.
So why did he make it?
The president tried to bomb Iran into submission for weeks. He issued dire threats to destroy its civilization. And when diplomacy stalled, he sent US bombers and missiles back aloft last week.
But in his epiphany about the cost of the war, he might finally have found what he’s been looking for almost since launching the conflict in February: a way out.
Sometimes, amid his cacophony, Trump produces candor that is rare in a president.
After the G7 summit, Wednesday, he confided that he’d studied how the stock market “shot up like a rocket ship” every time he spoke of possible peace with Iran and then would dip “very, very big” when headlines augured against a deal.
“The one president I did not want to be was the late, great Herbert Hoover,” he said, referring to the 20th-century commander in chief blamed for the Great Depression that wiped out investors and pitched millions of Americans into destitution.
The blowback from the Iran war hasn’t been as extreme, and the US economy remains robust. But the war sent gasoline prices soaring, helping to spike inflation, and its consequences appeared certain to deepen quickly.
Trump’s approval ratings, meanwhile, have dropped into the 30s, and the economic fallout from the war made him seem even more oblivious to the affordability crisis stalking many voters — which he again on Wednesday blasted as a smear campaign by Democrats.
Trump’s reasoning for ending the war is remarkable in many ways.
It will embolden critics who believe that the president often designed his various statements about the war — especially early in the week — to create a reaction on the stock market and to lower oil prices.
More seriously, his admission appeared to validate Iran’s strategic insight that the cost of the conflict would be more than Americans could bear once an initial US and Israeli aerial onslaught settled into a stalemate. This means Tehran’s new trump card — the capacity to shut down oil exports through the Strait of Hormuz — just got even more powerful.
Trump warned Wednesday that if Iran didn’t live up to its side of the agreement, he’d “drop bombs on their head.” But a relentless weekslong air war didn’t bring about regime change or force the Islamic Republic into a deal that favors Washington. So it may logically conclude Trump wouldn’t risk stock market routs and oil price hikes to enforce his demands. And a threat to bomb Iran again seems to be a contravention of the first clause of the memorandum of understanding (MOU), which bars the US from using “the threat or use of force against each other.”
Earlier in the conflict, the president seemed susceptible to critiques of Republican senators who feared he’d gone soft on Iran. But with the MOU signed, it will be harder for him to back out or change its terms.
The problem is not that Trump is wrong to end the war. If the fighting stops now, many American and Iranian lives may be saved. And an easing of economic fallout would make a measurable difference to the lives of many working Americans.
But there’s a big reason why some Republicans are so critical — including former Vice President Mike Pence, who on Tuesday told CNN’s Kaitlan Collins the emerging agreement felt like “appeasement.”
By paying such a high price to stop the fighting, Trump is effectively sending a message, not just to Iran but to other adversaries, that Washington’s resolve in military conflicts can be undermined if they find ways to turn up political heat through economic warfare.
He also appears to have abandoned Iranians after assuring them at the war’s beginning that it offered their “only chance for generations” to overthrow their brutal government. In a huge concession to Tehran, the memorandum commits both the United States and Iran to “refrain from interfering in each other’s internal affairs.”
Trump might have tied not only his own hands, but those of his successors.
Trump insisted after the G7 summit in France on Wednesday that the agreement would end the conflict and reopen the Strait of Hormuz. He’s placing a huge bet on a familiar assurance by Iran that it won’t seek a nuclear bomb that has previously been undermined by its enriching of uranium close to weapons-grade levels.
He also argued that his Iran policy needed to be judged across his two terms. He claimed that his decision to assassinate Iran’s security chief Qasem Soleimani in Baghdad in January 2020 had changed history. And he posited that the US bombing runs against Iran’s nuclear sites last year took the threat of a bomb off the table.
The president has a point about the strategic impact of his previous Iran policy. But if he’d solved the problem already, why did he launch a new war?
And not for the first time, Trump seemed to lose his grip on his Iran narrative in a rambling news conference. Most bewilderingly, after previously demanding “unconditional surrender,” he implied that Tehran was justified in wanting to have a missile program like its regional rivals.
And he offered more comfort to Iran by saying he didn’t see the 60-day timeline as a “hard deadline.”
In another odd twist, Trump signed a copy of the MOU at the Palace of Versailles and sent a photo to the Iranians.
“It’s signed,” Trump said. “Signed it in Versailles, I just signed it.”
His theatrical flourish will only reinforce the sense he believes the optics of an agreement are at least as important as what is in it.
And it raises this question: What if the signed MOU doesn’t usher in the more intense diplomacy that everyone expects — but instead is seen by Trump as establishing a new status quo that allows him to take a one-way exit ramp out of his entire Iran misadventure?