Iran First: Why Solving One War Can Break the Other?
Washington is trying to end two wars at once and failing at both. The Iran ceasefire is fraying. The Ukraine talks are frozen. The Trump administration treats these as separate problems requiring separate solutions. This is backwards. The fastest route to peace in Ukraine runs through Tehran — and the window to take it is closing.
The logic is sequential, not parallel. Settle Iran first, settle it fast, and the conditions that have kept the Ukraine war deadlocked for four years shift dramatically against Moscow. Fail to see the connection, and both conflicts grind on past the November midterms, past the point of political will, and into the kind of frozen stalemate that hardens into permanence.
Two reasons, one practical and one strategic. The practical reason is that the Iran negotiation is closer to resolution. A ceasefire, however violated, has held since 8 April, and Tehran has since submitted a 14-point proposal through Pakistani mediation. Washington and Tehran disagree on sequencing — Hormuz and nuclear constraints versus sanctions relief — but neither side has left the table. The zone of possible agreement is visible.
Ukraine offers no such opening. Three rounds of trilateral talks in the UAE and Switzerland produced nothing. Russia demands full control of the Donbas. Ukraine insists on freezing along current front lines. Carnegie’s analysts are right: the political track is deadlocked even as military negotiators inch forward on ceasefire mechanics. No amount of shuttle diplomacy will unstick these positions while Russia believes it can afford to wait.
The strategic reason is more important. An Iran deal does not just clear space on the diplomatic calendar. It actively degrades Russia’s ability to sustain the war in Ukraine. Four mechanisms do the work.
First, energy. Reopening Hormuz restores a fifth of global oil and gas supply to normal flow. Prices fall. Russia’s war budget — already haemorrhaging through deficits, emergency taxes, and........
