New Zealand's government is welcoming news of a ceasefire in the Middle East.
United States President Donald Trump says the US will suspend bombing of Iran for two weeks, with US officials reportedly saying Israel has agreed to the ceasefire, and Iran reportedly saying talks will get underway on April 10. However, there appears to be some confusion over when the ceasefire will start, which the US says will be when the Strait of Hormuz opens.
Foreign Minister Winston Peters says NZ welcomes the US and Iranian announcements, as it welcomes all efforts to bring an end to the conflict, which is causing major disruption to global fuel supplies and has sent prices soaring.
"While this is encouraging news, there remains significant important work to be done in the coming days to secure a lasting ceasefire. We are grateful for the work of Pakistan, and others such as Turkiye and Egypt, to seek to find a solution to the crisis," says Peters.
“As we discussed with [US] Secretary of State Marco Rubio today, this conflict has had wide-ranging impacts and disruptions - for both those in the Middle East and further afield including in New Zealand and the Pacific region."
"In the coming days and weeks, New Zealand will stand in support of all efforts to bring about a lasting, durable end to this conflict," Peters says.
News of the ceasefire saw share markets and the NZ dollar rise, and oil prices drop.
Prime Minister Christopher Luxon says the ceasefire is "incredibly encouraging," noting potential for ships to move through the Strait of Hormuz.
"Given where we've been in the course of this week, where we saw a lot of escalatory rhetoric... This is a really promising and really encouraging move," Luxon told journalists in Wellington.
"It's the most encouraging news I think we've had in this conflict, absolutely. But I'm also acknowledging this is a really complex conflict...there's a long way to go."
12 Comments
Maybe Trump won afterall
Not sure what Trump has won. Doesn't seem to be too much in the ten point peace plan other than seeking nuclear weapons which apparently were obliterated:
- Complete cessation of the war on Iraq, Lebanon, and Yemen
- Complete and permanent cessation of the war on Iran with no time limit
- Ending all conflicts in the region in their entirety
- Reopening the Strait of Hormuz
- Establishing a protocol and conditions to ensure freedom and security of navigation in the Strait of Hormuz
- Full payment of compensation for reconstruction costs to Iran
- Full commitment to lifting sanctions on Iran
- Release of Iranian funds and frozen assets held by the United States
- Iran fully commits to not seeking possession of any nuclear weapons
- Immediate ceasefire takes effect on all fronts immediately upon approval of the above conditions
That's not the list I read:
- Complete cessation of the war on Iraq, Lebanon, and Yemen
- Complete and permanent cessation of the war on Iran with no time limit
- Ending all conflicts in the region in their entirety
- Reopening the Strait of Hormuz
- Establishing a protocol and conditions to ensure freedom and security of navigation in the Strait of Hormuz
- Full payment of compensation for reconstruction costs to Iran
- Full commitment to lifting sanctions on Iran
- Release of Iranian funds and frozen assets held by the United States
- Iran fully commits to not seeking possession of any nuclear weapons
- Immediate ceasefire takes effect on all fronts immediately upon approval of the above conditions
You changed your list!
How many of those are wins for Iran? Just 6, 7, 8.
DJT is probably constantly changing his list too.
Neither will be negotiating what is best for their country, just what looks best for the leaders. Both sides will claim a massive win.
As far as I can tell, Iran has been smashed and the US hasn't been touched.
Apparently Chairman of Joint Chiefs of Staff General Caine has a habit of asking in conference “then what” and indeed, it is a very good question. There is nothing here to stop the Iranian regime from recommencing production of a nuclear bomb nor from closing the Straits of Hormuz at will. Yes an agreement, treaty or whatever may be concluded but as Trump himself has expressed there is nothing to stop the Iranians from abandoning it and now even more significantly the Iranian hierarchy, in particular the Republican Guard senior officers, have proved to themselves that they can remain unbreachable. Be that as it may, for the sake of the hard pressed Iranian population, a cessation of hostilities and deferment of destruction of utilities essential to their daily life, will clearly be very welcome.
1-3 and 5 are generally good for Iran and their allies too. And only 9 is a "concession" on their side and that's not really offering more than what Obama had already got out of them previously.
JJ is a classic example of what happens when you start from a skewed base-line.
This is a massive change to global politics - a step-down after a lot of pressure. It isn't about 'Iran or the US winning' - it is about hegemony failure, human overshoot and degrowth, and corruption doubling-down to save its skin.
The major hegemony of this last 70 years is disintegrating. I've long opined here that a going-down Empire has to go to war early - the pretender(s) have to delay as long as possible. Clearly the US has been on the way down for some time - decades - but the chosen metric, GDP, fails to measure that.
It has shot its bolt and been found wanting. Global leaders have noticed; 40 got together ex the US, to discuss the future - and I don't think that included China? The US is being sidelined - better-put, it has sidelined itself.
The new order will include China, Russia, Iran and India - plus satellites like Malasia. The new out-pirates will be what was the first world - likely including NZ. We were lucky in out timing; we got the best of the best of times, for longer than most. Now we need to become self-sufficient and resilient - because this was a curtain-raiser, if it isn't Act 1.
Anyone running a book on when this 'ceasefire' will start and how long it will last?
It appears all 3 sides have totally incompatible definitions of its terms.
Or they are all wording the conditions differently to their people. The main part of the agreement will be that each leader can say they won.
What agreement?
We welcome your comments below. If you are not already registered, please register to comment
Remember we welcome robust, respectful and insightful debate. We don't welcome abusive or defamatory comments and will de-register those repeatedly making such comments. Our current comment policy is here.