The Iranian Ten-Point Plan Accepted by Trump According to the Security Council Statement:

After rejecting all proposals submitted by the enemy, Iran drafted a ten-point plan and presented it to the American side via Pakistan, emphasizing the following key points:

• Organized passage through the Strait of Hormuz in coordination with the Iranian Armed Forces, granting Iran a unique economic and geopolitical status.

• The necessity of ending the war against all components of the Axis of Resistance, signifying a historic defeat for Israeli aggression.

• The withdrawal of U.S. combat forces from all bases and deployment points in the region.

• The establishment of a secure transit protocol in the Strait of Hormuz, ensuring Iranian sovereignty according to the agreed-upon mechanism.

• Payment of full reparations to Iran based on assessments.

• The lifting of all primary and secondary sanctions, and the cancellation of Security Council and Board of Governors resolutions.

• The release of all Iranian funds and assets frozen abroad.

• The formalization of all these points within a binding resolution issued by the Security Council. The adoption of this resolution would transform these understandings into a binding international legal obligation, representing a significant diplomatic victory for the Iranian people.

Analysis 1. The Ceiling of Demands and the Guarantee Dilemma The statement is not understood as an announcement of the war's end, but rather as a negotiating framework conditioned on the implementation of terms on the ground—a point acknowledged by the Secretariat itself. In diplomacy, the ceiling of demands is raised and the framework is drawn before an agreement; however, the crux remains the enforcement mechanism. Experience with the United States shows that the problem is not accepting terms on paper, but ensuring their practical execution. Thus, the coming days do not test the drafting of the agreement as much as they test the ability to bind the other party to it. 2. Field Equations and Ceasefire Calculations Field data, including a March report from the Royal United Services Institute regarding the sharp decline in Israeli and U.S. missile stockpiles over sixteen days, explains why a ceasefire serves their direct interests. Accepting conditions under pressure is a significant achievement, but it requires, in return, doubling readiness and not treating this moment as the end of the path, but rather a station within an open conflict. 3. Significance of Operational Incapacity and Negotiation Logic The United States' inability to open the Strait of Hormuz even for a few hours, and its failure to remove uranium enriched to 60% from Isfahan, carry decisive significance regarding the limits of operational capability in this round. Had either of these steps succeeded, the course of the war would have changed radically. After exhausting tools and options, the enemy arrived at negotiations. A party that begins a war from a position of superiority does not negotiate with its opponent; it imposes conditions upon them. Conclusion This was not the desired end for this round of the battle, in which the Axis sacrificed its greatest leader, His Eminence Sayyid Ali Khamenei. We take pride in the achievements reached in the field, but eyes must remain fixed upon it; the treacherous enemy may reopen the battle sooner or later, and future rounds may bring the decisive chapter in this conflict.