2026-06-22T04:00:25.505Z / https://www.cnn.com/2026/06/22/politics/iran-trump-peace-hard
- 副总统J·D·万斯在瑞士与伊朗举行的和平谈判因执行唐纳德·特朗普总统的协议遭遇早期波折。
- 伊朗方面称已封锁霍尔木兹海峡，尽管该备忘录中约定要开放该海峡。
- 两党议员均质疑特朗普在这份为期60天的框架协议中是否放弃了过多谈判筹码。
AI生成摘要经CNN编辑审核。
与伊朗达成和平将与发动战争一样痛苦。
副总统J·D·万斯首次在瑞士展开谈判，试图将与德黑兰签署的谅解备忘录转化为永久结束战争的协议，但谈判已陷入险境。
特朗普上周在法国签署的这份谅解备忘录停止了战斗、开放了霍尔木兹海峡，并向伊朗提供经济优惠，以换取伊朗承诺永远不发展核武器。但该协议将德黑兰核计划未来及其浓缩铀库存等关键细节留待60天的高风险谈判中敲定。
该协议最可取之处在于结束了美伊之间的直接敌对状态。
前美国高级国家安全官员菲利普·戈登周日在接受CNN的法里德·扎卡里亚采访时表示：“至少停火协议有很大可能得以维持，因为这符合双方的利益。”他援引德黑兰每日可开始赚取数百万美元石油收入的情况称：“伊朗有遵守协议的动力。美国当然也有坚持下去的动力，因为它不想重新开战。”
在GPS节目：前奥巴马政府官员谈与伊朗实现持久和平之路
5:46 • 来源：CNN
https://www.cnn.com/
5:46
联合调解方卡塔尔和巴基斯坦在美国东部时间周日晚间发表声明称，谈判在“积极且建设性的氛围”中进行，并取得了“令人鼓舞的进展”。双方商定了一份路线图，将在60天内达成最终协议。
但该框架协议的脆弱性迅速显现，因为定义这场战争的同样战略压力和制约因素，如今正威胁着和平进程。
伊朗正寻求利用其新获得的筹码，并宣称已封锁霍尔木兹海峡。特朗普周日回应了新的暴力威胁，并警告德黑兰的谈判团队可能无法平安回国。而以色列与伊朗在黎巴嫩的冲突险些彻底破坏整个和平进程。
在华盛顿，两党罕见地一致担忧总统为达成协议让步过多，同时也有人怀疑协议能否持久，尽管人们对战斗可能永久结束感到松了一口气。
这些波折削弱了特朗普所称的历史性胜利的说法，也表明结束战争带来的全球经济缓解效果十分脆弱。德黑兰正在表明，它将与华盛顿进行一场极其痛苦的谈判。更广泛地说，这场紧张局势重新将人们的注意力转向特朗普的批评者所称的总统发动战争的战略失误——这场战争正走向一个混乱、可能长达数月的善后阶段。
但这份谅解备忘录仍是避免重回冲突的最佳希望，重回冲突可能会造成更多伊朗人和美国人的死亡，将海湾国家重新拖入交火，并再次冲击全球经济，推高本已难以承担日常开支的消费者的物价——这也是特朗普上周试图为该谅解备忘录辩护时援引的因素。
尽管特朗普的民主党批评者指出了其政府的战略失误，但维持该协议并让本届政府争取到最佳最终方案仍符合美国的重大国家利益。
特朗普从欧洲回国后的紧张周末暴露了未来的战略挑战。
▶ 总统仍对伊朗深感不满。他重复了战争期间未能奏效的威胁，以迫使伊朗遵守谅解备忘录。例如，周日他威胁称，如果德黑兰不重新开放霍尔木兹海峡，他将亲自接管该海峡。这一行动的巨大成本让美国在战争期间不敢尝试。因此，伊朗可能会怀疑他在福克斯新闻采访中带着粗口发出的警告的可信度。
德黑兰也明白，特朗普急于在11月的中期选举前从和平协议中收回经济和政治利益。伊朗首席谈判代表穆罕默德·巴赫尔·加利巴夫周日在X平台上写道：“他们难道从不扪心自问，如果他们的威胁真的奏效，他们今天不会落到如此绝望的境地吗？”他的策略表明，伊朗无意快速达成协议，以免让特朗普迅速宣称取得政治胜利。
▶ 伊朗政权显然还想证明，其生存为波斯湾带来了新的战略曙光。它公然违背谅解备忘录，宣布封锁霍尔木兹海峡，目的是迫使特朗普在以色列袭击伊朗支持的真主党民兵后执行黎巴嫩的停火协议。
伊朗既在考验特朗普控制以色列总理本雅明·内塔尼亚胡的能力，也在表明它打算通过代理团体维持其地区影响力。尽管特朗普和万斯严厉批评以色列，但总统周日也向德黑兰传递了一个信息，警告伊朗如果不约束真主党，他将“非常强硬地打击”伊朗。
▶ 历史表明，以色列经常在停火截止前后甚至之后继续军事行动，以证明它绝不会妥协其视为至关重要的国家安全利益。以色列在周五和周六袭击了其声称是真主党的目标，但随着瑞士谈判的开始，脆弱的停火协议生效。
内塔尼亚胡处境微妙，在特朗普的压力和许多以色列人对特朗普总统协议的反对之间左右为难。而伊朗坚持要求黎巴嫩境内所有战斗停止，意味着这个经常被拖入其他国家战争的国家可能再次颠覆地区和平的希望。
▶ 尽管前景黯淡，但特朗普政府正在进行一场大胆的赌博，万斯在谈判前对伊朗民众的讲话就体现了这一点。他说：“如果你们的领导人愿意放弃充当地区不稳定的推手，如果他们愿意长期放弃核武器野心，那么美国愿意从根本上改变与该国的关系。”
但历史表明，这一目标可能存在缺陷。近50年来，伊朗的革命领袖一直将其政权定义为美国的敌人。几乎没有证据表明德黑兰出现了新的务实派，他们会接受可能削弱其压制性控制的经济开放政策。
谅解备忘录的后果也在华盛顿引发了政治风波。
这加剧了总统与共和党参议员之间的紧张关系，此前参议员们因特朗普任命比尔·普尔特尔担任国家情报总监临时主管，以及他试图迫使不情愿的共和党多数派在中期选举前通过全面的选举制度改革而激化矛盾。
人们对谅解备忘录的条款也深表怀疑——包括在60天谈判期间豁免伊朗能源和药品出口的制裁，以及美国称将由地区大国提供资金的3000亿美元基金以重振伊朗经济。特朗普的批评者警告称，他不过是花钱换来了海峡的重新开放，并在即将到来的伊朗核计划谈判中浪费了美国的谈判筹码。
然而，共和党鹰派、特朗普的总统盟友林赛·格雷厄姆参议员为特朗普的做法进行了辩护，尽管他对协议能否成功并不抱太大希望。这位南卡罗来纳州议员在接受CBS《面对全国》采访时表示：“如果不通过谅解备忘录走外交途径，那么你要么不得不开战，要么采取其他形式的胁迫。让我们试试这个，让我们试试外交解决方案。”但他补充道：“我认为它会失败。”
新泽西州民主党参议员科里·布克称伊朗协议是“特朗普一手造成的灾难性失败”和“彻头彻尾的投降”。他在NBC《与媒体见面》节目中警告称：“伊朗获得了所有好处， literally数十亿数十亿美元，而美国继续承受损失，从我们在战争中花费的1000亿美元，到每个美国公民看到的成本飙升。”
激烈的几天交锋表明，特朗普打造无核伊朗和变革中东的愿景，目前仍是一个遥远的愿望。这表明，他发动战争造成的战略死胡同，如今正与阻碍和平之路的类似困境相匹配。
发动战争未能实现美国的目标。而和平进程的艰难开局表明，达成和平可能同样徒劳无功。
Iran shows Trump just how hard making peace will be
2026-06-22T04:00:25.505Z / https://www.cnn.com/2026/06/22/politics/iran-trump-peace-hard
- Vice President JD Vance’s peace talks with Iran in Switzerland face early turbulence over implementing President Donald Trump’s agreement.
- Iran has said it shut down the Strait of Hormuz despite agreeing to open it in the memorandum.
- Lawmakers from both parties question whether Trump gave away too much leverage in the 60-day framework.
AI-generated summary was reviewed by a CNN editor.
Making peace with Iran is going to be just as painful as waging war.
Vice President JD Vance’s first attempts at talks in Switzerland to solidify a memorandum of understanding with Tehran into a permanent end to the war are already in treacherous waters.
The MOU signed by Trump in France last week halts fighting, opens the Strait of Hormuz and offers economic carrots to Iran in exchange for a pledge never to develop nuclear weapons. But it leaves vital details like the future of Tehran’s nuclear program and its stocks of enriched uranium to be hashed out over 60 days of high-stakes negotiations.
The best thing in the agreement’s favor is the end of direct US-Iran hostilities.
“There’s decent chance at least that the truce holds simply because it is in the interest of both sides,” Philip Gordon, a former senior US national security official, told CNN’s Fareed Zakaria on Sunday, citing Tehran’s capacity to begin earning millions of dollars a day in oil revenues. “Iran has an interest in sticking with this. And the United States certainly has an interest in sticking with this, because it doesn’t want to resume the war.”
On GPS: Former Obama administration official on the path to lasting peace with Iran
5:46 • Source: CNN
https://www.cnn.com/
5:46
Co-mediators Qatar and Pakistan said in a statement late Sunday US time that the talks took place in a “positive and constructive atmosphere” and that “encouraging progress” was made. They said a roadmap was agreed to reach a final deal within 60 days.
But the vulnerability of the framework is quickly becoming obvious as the same strategic pressures and constraints that defined the war now threaten the peace.
Iran is seeking to apply its newly acquired leverage and has claimed to shut down the Strait of Hormuz. Trump responded with a new threat of violence Sunday and warned Tehran’s negotiating team might not make it home. And a clash between Israel and Iran over Lebanon threatened to scupper the entire process.
In Washington, there’s rare bipartisan concern that the president gave too much away to make the agreement, along with doubts that it will last, despite relief that fighting could end permanently.
The turbulence undercut Trump’s claims that he won a historic victory and suggests global economic relief secured by ending the war is tenuous. Tehran is showing it will drive an excruciating bargain with Washington. More broadly, the tension refocuses attention on what Trump’s critics see as a strategic blunder by the president in launching a war that is yielding to a messy, perhaps monthslong aftermath.
Yet the memorandum still represents the best hope of averting a return to conflict that could cost many more Iranian and American lives, draw Gulf states back into the crossfire, and again rock the global economy, driving up prices for consumers already struggling to meet the costs of everyday life — a factor Trump cited in trying to justify the MOU last week.
While Trump’s Democratic critics are pointing out the strategic failures of his administration, there’s still a strong US national interest in the agreement holding and the administration securing the best end-game possible.
A tense weekend since Trump returned home from Europe laid bare the strategic challenges ahead.
▶ The president remains deeply frustrated with Iran. He’s repeating the kind of threats that failed during the war to make it comply with the MOU. On Sunday, for instance, he threatened to take over the Strait of Hormuz himself if Tehran didn’t reopen it. The huge costs of that move kept the US from trying to do so during the war. Iran may therefore doubt the credibility of his warning, delivered with an expletive during a Fox News interview.
Tehran also understands that Trump is in a hurry as he seeks to recoup economic and political benefits of a peace deal before November’s midterm elections. “Don’t they ever think to themselves that if their threats had actually worked, they wouldn’t have reached this level of desperation today?” Iran’s chief negotiator, Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, wrote on X on Sunday. His gambit suggests that Iran has no intention of giving the US president a fast deal that will allow him to quickly claim a political victory.
▶ Iran’s regime also apparently wants to show that its survival created a new strategic dawn in the Persian Gulf. Its declaration that the Strait of Hormuz is closed — in defiance of the MOU — was intended to force Trump to enforce a ceasefire in Lebanon following Israeli strikes on the Iranian-backed Hezbollah militia.
Iran is both testing Trump’s ability to control Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and showing it intends to preserve its regional power through proxy groups. While Trump and Vance have harshly criticized Israel, the president sent his own message back to Tehran on Sunday, warning he’d hit it “very hard” if it didn’t rein in Hezbollah.
▶ History shows that Israel often continues military activity up to and beyond ceasefire deadlines to demonstrate that it will never compromise what it regards as its vital national security interests. It struck what it described as Hezbollah targets in Lebanon on Friday and Saturday, but as the talks started in Switzerland, a fragile ceasefire descended.
Netanyahu is in a dicey spot, torn between Trump’s pressure and the opposition of many Israelis to the US president’s agreement. And Iran’s insistence on an end to all fighting in Lebanon means a nation constantly dragged into other countries’ wars could again upend hopes of regional peace.
▶ Despite grim prospects, the Trump administration is making an audacious bet exemplified by Vance’s comments before the talks to the people of Iran. “If your leadership is willing to give up being a driver of regional instability, if they are willing to give up nuclear weapons ambitions for the long term, then the United States is willing to fundamentally transform our relationship with that country,” he said.
But history shows such a goal may be flawed. For nearly 50 years, Iran’s revolutionary leaders have defined their regime as the enemy of America. There’s little evidence that a new band of pragmatists has risen in Tehran who will embrace an economic opening that could fray their repressive control.
The fallout from the memorandum is also causing political uproar in Washington.
It worsened tensions between the president and Republican senators already inflamed by a showdown over his choice of Bill Pulte as interim director of national intelligence and his attempts to force a reluctant GOP majority to pass sweeping changes to voting arrangements before the midterms.
There’s also deep skepticism over the memorandum’s terms — including waiving sanctions on Iran’s energy and pharmaceutical exports while 60-day talks are underway and a $300 billion fund to reinvigorate its economy that the US says will be funded by regional powers. Trump’s critics warned he simply paid for the reopening of the strait and squandered US leverage in delicate talks to come on Iran’s nuclear program.
However, Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham, a GOP hawk and presidential ally, defended Trump’s approach, even without much hope it will work. “If you don’t have a diplomatic path through the MOU, then you have to go to war or some other form of coercion. Let’s try this. Let’s try a diplomatic solution,” the South Carolina lawmaker told CBS’ “Face the Nation.” But he added that “I think it’s going to fail.”
Sen. Cory Booker, a New Jersey Democrat, called the Iran agreement a “cataclysmic failure of (Trump’s) own making” and an “abject surrender.” On NBC’s “Meet the Press,” he warned that “Iran gets all of the benefits, literally billions and billions of dollars, and America continues to hurt and see the losses from the $100 billion we spent in the war to every American citizen seeing their costs skyrocket.”
An acrimonious few days reveal Trump’s vision for a nuclear-free Iran and a transformed Middle East as, for now, a distant aspiration. They suggest the strategic dead end he created by launching the war is now matched by a similar conundrum thwarting the road to peace.
Waging war failed to fulfill US goals. A tough start shows that making peace may be similarly futile.