Pepe Escobar – telegraph.ph July 16, 2026
Let’s start with four key variables at work in this increasingly dangerous crossroads.
One. The Majlis – the Iranian Parliament – met on Tuesday night, at the start of the new Mojtaba era, which started last Friday after the final burial rites of former, assassinated Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khamenei in Mashhad. The 290 members unanimously passed two resolutions.
The first one demands the government – under President Pezeshkian – to “accelerate nuclear capabilities”. That may be interpreted either as driving up uranium enrichment, or something way more groundbreaking.
The second resolution rejects any (italics mine) compromise with the US on previously agreed terms. Translation: even if there would be a renewed memorandum of understanding (MoU), de facto blown up by the President of the United States straight out of the NATO summit in Ankara, the terms would be much harsher for the US.
Two. The Iran-Pakistan-Qatar channel.
Earlier this week Islamabad and Doha have resumed intense consultations – one might even brand them as frantic – trying to reopen direct talks with Tehran this coming Sunday.
That’s a Sisyphean task, because it would have to take place in sharp contrast with heavy American bombing of Iranian targets – including civilian infrastructure – and the motto echoed by millions in the streets of Iran last week: “Revenge”.
The diplomacy though is real. Yet it has been demoted by the mediators from “path to settlement” to “prevention of catastrophe.”
Three. The Trump-Munir backchannel.
Mediators at the sorry remnants of the negotiating table confirm that Trump continues to place direct calls to Pakistan’s Field Marshal Asim Munir, pressing him to find an off-ramp that avoids personal humiliation.
That completely voids trademark vociferations by POTUS – always dominating the news cycle – that Iran is begging to do a deal. Reality is exactly the opposite. Munir, incidentally, is the Last Chance Saloon for Trump when it comes to an off-ramp.
Four. The Iranian military response to US bombing.
That includes, crucially, precision cluster munitions devastating US bases in Kuwait, Bahrain and Jordan.
The overwhelming majority of the real damage is not being reported publicly. From Al Udeid Air Base in Qatar to the Command and Control Center in Jordan; to erased Patriot missile systems in Kuwait to Al Dhafra Air Base in the UAE; from wiping out MQ-9 drone hangars and HIMARS launchers and ammo depots to obliterated refueling platforms in Oman’s Duqm port.
That one was a banger: Duqm is on Arabian Sea coast, outside of the Strait of Hormuz. That’s where American ships dock without entering the Persian Gulf, refuel, and receive repair and supply services: a key node of the operational rear of the US fleet deployed in the northern Indian Ocean.
Where is Mojtaba Khamenei at?
Once again: even if there would be a path towards an MoU 2.0, at the very first meeting Tehran would make it crystal clear: Washington must implement paragraph 1 of the MoU (on the end of all wars). Without that, no talks. Meanwhile, with or without a Trump Blockade 2.0, Tehran will keep the Strait of Hormuz heavily restricted: transit is only possible via the IRGC Navy channels off Larak island.
Now for The Mojtaba Enigma.
The security architecture of West Asia has not merely shifted. It has fractured and reset. The terms of the reset are being dictated from Tehran – which on top of it holds escalation dominance across the Persian Gulf.
The 14-point MoU spells out Iran setting the terms – and the mediators/negotiators know it. They are scrambling like mad to keep even a flimsy indirect talking channel alive.
New Leader Mojtaba Khamenei enjoys overwhelming national consensus. Since last Friday, as the Leader of a new era, he de facto rules via written directives.
An influential member of the Majlis, Mahmoud Nabavian, has already read some of Mojtaba’s internal letters on Iranian state TV – where he opposes any nuclear concessions; demands US compensation; and insists on exclusive Iranian control of the Strait of Hormuz.
Iran is simply not going to be forced back to the table – whatever arguments deployed by mediators and armchair outsiders. The widespread chants of mourners over six days, from Tehran and Qom to Mashhad, day and night, called for “Revenge”. And Mojtaba reiterated that very point in his written statement.
The religious and strategic narrative shaping the new era of the Islamic Republic of Iran deeply embeds the death of Ayatollah Khamenei within the foundational narrative of Shi’ite political identity – metastasizing an assassination by a foreign power into a sacred act of sacrifice.
And “revenge” here assumes a transcendental connotation. Mojtaba has not portrayed “revenge” as a political choice or a matter of state policy. He has defined it as the will of the nation. And, most of all, as an atemporal, divine mission.
So History will decide when “revenge” is accomplished. Mojtaba framed it as not depending on himself personally, or on any state body or functionary: “free people around the world” will each carry out part of this sacred mission.
As a statement of political theology in the post-modern era, this is in a class by itself.
Narcissus drowning in its own spin
Meanwhile, Ghalibaf and Araghchi’s negotiating track and Vahidi’s IRGC military command and control track will continue to coexist inside the government led by President Pezeshkian. These are in fact two vectors of the same process. All the spin about internal “fractures” is – what else – American spin.
Now let’s talk about the spinners. It’s public knowledge that the Zionist Washington-New York-Tel Aviv axis is breaking their backs to keep the US locked and loaded into Totaler Krieg (“Total War”) mode.
That’s how every move by Tehran – always defensive – is portrayed as a casus belli. And an off-ramp such as the MoU is debased as “appeasement.” The Totaler Krieg mentality assures a perpetual escalation ladder. And it does offer Tehran the justification for any response – be it the closure of the Strait of Hormuz or the possibility of a NPT withdrawal. And that reinforces Zionist hawks to press for – what else – more war.
This infernal machine, a self-trapping cycle, ultimately benefits Iran – because Iran only needs the cycle to continue. Every twist and turn converts American imperial devastation methods into accrued Iranian legitimacy – domestically and across most of the Global South.
Trump is in total Narcissus Drowned territory, facing a series of intolerable imperatives: a closed Strait of Hormuz, inevitably spiking oil prices when the Strategic Petroleum Reserves (SPR) hit red alert; Iran’s possible NPT withdrawal.
It’s important to remember that the 60-day MoU clock expires in mid-August – only a month from now. A final deal must be struck by then or the whole framework lapses.
Once again, for the record: for Tehran the original 14-point MoU is the only game in town. There will be no (italics mine) renegotiation; only implementation of its sequencing. Tehran always has to make this crystal clear – because the Americans still don’t get. Tehran has already won the war’s central question: the Strait of Hormuz. That was never about the nuclear dossier. Washington will have to ratify this reality.
Well, that will be nearly impossible. Scenarios ahead look gloomy.
“Managed de-escalation” now looks like a mirage in the desert.
Same for a frozen stalemate – where talks continue; no deal; sporadic tanker incidents; shipping stays at ⅓–⅕ of pre-war levels.
As it stands, all vectors point instead to vertical escalation: total Hormuz closure; the imminent, hardcore US strike wave; Iran responding by withdrawing from the NPT.
For all practical purposes, Trump isn’t negotiating with Iran. He’s desperately trying to reverse a massive strategic defeat.
The “ceasefire” was always a timeout to recover lost leverage. Trump wanted surrender, total capitulation, regime change, Iran as a neo-colony. He got a MoU that he does not understand, and may not even have read, although he signed it, with much pomp, in Versailles. He doesn’t even understand that the document he signed does not allocate decision making on the Strait of Hormuz between Iran and Oman: only to Iran.
That’s why he is trying to rewrite what he signed without admitting it – by deploying the escalation ladder; hardcore coercion disguised as diplomacy; forcing Tehran to surrender its leverage; and going full psycho, threatening next week to strike all of Iran’s power plants, bridges and energy sites.
Technically, Iran held up every end of the MoU they signed. It was the US – and these are only a few examples – that refused to release Iran’s frozen assets; imposed new sanctions (direct violation of Article 9); shred the oil sanction waivers (direct violation of Article 10); resumed the war (direct violation of Article 1).
History will eventually treat this as a case study on how to run a war clock. Tehran is deliberately holding back against Washington because time – and the oil markets – are on its side. The SPR will be depleted in less than a month, and Iran’s leverage in the Strait of Hormuz is total.
Only a civilization-state, accustomed to dealing with all sorts of historical variables, is capable of playing a much longer game than a brutal imperial machine, conserving essential firepower while draining what remains of the imperial strategic buffer.



> Trump isn’t negotiating with Iran. He’s desperately trying to reverse a massive strategic defeat.
So not an actual defeat them?
> (italics mine)
All your italics they belong to us.
> That’s a Sisyphean task
How overtly intellectual of you.
> Where is Mojtaba Khamenei at?
He/she/it is in hospital after trying to pronounce his/her/its name.
> Now for The Mojtaba Enigma.
Ooooo. I can’t wait.
> Narcissus drowning in its own spin
Does “pepe” mean his/her/itself?
> This infernal machine
In writing 101, “pepe” skipped the class on pretension.
> It’s important to remember that the 60-day MoU clock expires in mid-August
It is? Blimey. I’m guessing the 18th of August.
> Once again, for the record
No. Please. Stop.
> Only a civilization-state, accustomed to dealing with all sorts of historical variables, is capable of playing a much longer game than a brutal imperial machine
Ah. I forgot. Always go to the last line first, to see what it’s all about. Our civilisation is better than yours. Right. Gotya.
Iran. The country that’s never done anything militarily throughout its entire history except skirmishes with its neighbours, is holding back the “brutal imperial machine” with a clock. Or something.
If you want to lose the Sisyphean rock, just spell it out. The tribe is “fighting” itself for profit and to ease the goyim into WW3. See? It’s simple. You don’t need a latin dictionary.
Iran should never negociate in any form wth Trump ,
the assassin of General Soleimani who was on a trusting
peaceful mission .
REVENGE ! Rockets war on US soil !
Iran, world will bless you !
More BS. They’re is no ‘strategic defeat’ because its all being orchestrated & produced by the Moses Mafia, who rules both the US & Iran. The Jews themselves revealed to the world on the 60 Minutes TV show (Pager Plot episode 12-22-24) that “we rule the world behind the scenes like Truman Show”. I believe it was the great one, Nico X, who first exposed this on numerous alt news sites, which were strangely silent about this major revelation of global control.
Informative to a degree, but you failed to mention the Blow-Fly in the ointment – Israel – the real cancer and motivator in this latest continuation of war.
Why are the writings of Pepe Escobar generally so peppered with bullshit? Is he really a truther or is he a multi-poplar geopolitical ideologue advocating moral relativism on a global scale?
To AI Overview after other questions about Escobar – July 18, 2026
Question: If Pepe Escobar either rejects or ignores the Christian basis of the 1945 and 1948 international conventions on the sovereignty of nations and basic human rights, does he really advocate them as any kind of universal authority, and if he does then what is his religious or ideological basis to sustain them?
Answer:
“Pepe Escobar does not advocate for international conventions or human rights as a “universal authority” in the way Western liberal internationalists do. Because he rejects the idea of a universal cultural or religious foundation, his support for post-WWII legal frameworks is strictly tactical, pragmatic, and grounded in a Westphalian model of absolute state sovereignty.
He maintains no religious foundation for these concepts, and his ideological basis to sustain them relies on a sharp distinction between the UN Charter (which he defends) and the Western concept of Universal Human Rights (which he heavily critiques).”
– Escobar does not view the 1945 UN Charter as a moral text rooted in Christian or Western natural law. Instead, he views it strictly as a legal shield for the Global South.”
– Regarding the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Escobar rejects the premise that any singular, universal moral authority exists to dictate how individual societies should govern themselves.
Civilizational Pluralism: Influenced by Eurasianist thinkers like Aleksandr Dugin, Escobar argues that the world is composed of distinct “civilizational states” (e.g., China, Russia, the Islamic world). Each civilization possesses its own internal moral, spiritual, and legal matrix that is just as valid as the Western model.
Relativism Over Universalism: He believes that human rights are not static, universal laws derived from a Creator or abstract reason. Instead, they are culturally relative. How China defines collective societal rights, or how Iran defines religious civic rights, should not be judged by the yardstick of Western individualism.”
Not that there are no truths in what Escobar says, but with his promotion of multipolar globalism, he is only promoting the major superpower states and falling into the contrived dialectic between unipolar and multipolar globalism:
– The unipolar model quickly went astray with the distortions by the Western power moguls using various pretexts and lies to conquer weaker nations and exploit their people and resources (which is NOT universalism based on the laws of God, but rather simply based on the “might-makes-right” creed of the power moguls, coupled to their praxis much like the Marxist or Fascist one of “the ends justify the means”. Escobar is right about the resulting evils and abuses the way the term ‘universalism’ has been used, but he lacks the substance in his own creed really to call anything “right” or “wrong”, on a universal basis. Hence, he ends up being a “moral relativist” with nothing or any real weight or substance to distinguish between good and evil, and to condemn the evils going on in the world.
– The second model called “multipolar globalism”, which Escobar is always pumping as some kind of panacea from the first model is used as a pretext for “imperialism”. It is the other half of the fake dialectic, and also is used by the puppet masters as a pretext to usurp basic rights or people and nations. The present regime running the US is not pushing universal or “unipolar” globalism, as did those of the Obama and Biden regimes backed by the Rothschild Soros wing, with their insane world-government and nation-deconstruction goals. Rather, the present US and Isreal regimes with their deals with “multipolar” Putin and Xi, are busy carving up the world into various spheres of control.
The international globalist order is made up essentially of the major financial powers and multinational corporations, and their only real goal is more and more centralized controls over virtually everything. Iran is struggling for its own sovereignty right as a nation, but it appears that multi-polar Russia has agreed by virtue of the might-makes-right principles at work, and its own limitations, that it quietly must abandon Iran, just as it abandoned Syria, taking with it a huge chunk of the Ukraine.
The point is that if there was a true universalism followed by the powers which govern our nations and which were based on the laws of God for us, there would be no imperialism and there would be effective economic checks by nations united on those universal principles against regimes violating basic human rights and the sovereignty rights of other nations. The real problem in the corruption process is the alleged “right to lie” to us by people holding positions of authority and trust. They freely use all sorts of deception, lies, fear, and oppression as well as their exclusive possession of what is fact and truth. Dishonesty is now a way of legitimacy and life for those in power and wealth. Putin, Xi, Trump, Vance, Carney and most other so-called “leaders” in this regard are all liars and dissemblers of the truth. They are not instruments of God but reflect more the Satanic power moguls behind them pulling their strings.
Iran, like the Ukraine, is on the dissembling power-mogul chopping block, and God be with its people to pull together and resist, and may we also help them as best we can.
LOL
Mr Lying is analising peepee escovitz via chump bot, dear dear..don’t forget peepee coined the term ‘snail offensive’ to describe Vlad’s dawdling in the Ukraine…the fact he’s a langley mole like peepee didn’t surface above his rhetorical miasma..
of course when consulting a robot oracle, mechanical orifice, artificial imbecile, one should bear in mind that it could splatter blather like the house of conmen on a rainy fucking wednesday in april, in the parliamrent bar, two quid a pint..
stuff that in your westfailian models drawers…
and ‘ave a cigar..
my pro nico comment blocked