Trump’s ‘Final Offer,’ a Nuclear Deal Better Than Obama’s, Iran ‘Not Far’ From a Nuclear Bomb

A new pope should be installed in the first couple weeks of May. Meanwhile, Germany is scheduled to have its new chancellor, Friedrich Merz, who happens to be Roman Catholic, take office around May 6. The two men filling these offices are likely to bring monumental changes to Europe. This morning’s feature article, by Josué Michels, discusses the potential significance of this convergence in the change of leadership in these two pillars of Europe, church and state.

[BRIEF]

Don’t expect Ukraine to agree to Trump’s “final offer” for peace: The Trump administration is expected to present a proposal today to end Russia’s war on Ukraine. Jeremiah Jacques calls the plan “a godsend to Russia.” It gives Russia formal U.S. recognition of Crimea’s annexation, de facto control over other occupied regions, removal of all sanctions since 2014, guarantees against Ukraine’s NATO membership, and enhanced industrial and energy cooperation with the U.S. In contrast, Ukraine receives vague security guarantees, a few other smaller concessions, and a minerals deal granting the U.S. access to Ukraine’s resources. This is apparently Trump’s “final offer,” meaning that if Ukraine rejects it, he is ready to walk away from the situation.

Trumpet publisher Gerald Flurry has warned for years against such dealing with Russia. In 2017 he wrote “Should Donald Trump Trust Vladimir Putin?” After detailing a great deal of brutality and evil this man has perpetrated, he wrote:

What will happen to a country that will “get along very well with Vladimir Putin”? That’s not just a rhetorical question. The closer our president and our nation gets to Putin, the further it gets from what is good and what is right—the further it gets from God! That is deadly dangerous! Putin will stay true to his character and prey on President Trump, and America as he has preyed on others. And we will deserve it for having cozied up with him.

Once again, the fatal flaw in Trump’s foreign policy is on display. And it’s not only with Russia:

Iran wants a nuclear deal better than what Obama gave: Iranian Foreign Minister Seyed Abbas Araghchi withdrew from speaking in person at the Carnegie International Nuclear Policy Conference on Monday, but he later published his speech on X. It well shows Iran’s strident boldness as it approaches nuclear negotiations with President Trump. Two points in particular stand out from this extraordinary speech. First, Araghchi said:

First, certain special interest groups are blatantly attempting to manipulate the course of the current Iran-U.S. diplomacy. Their effort includes the fake claim that a potential deal will be another JCPOA [the Obama nuclear deal]. While a significant achievement, I want to make absolutely clear that many in Iran believe that the JCPOA is no longer good enough for us. They demand a new accord that guarantees Iran’s interests while addressing the concerns of all parties. I tend to agree with this demand.

Araghchi says openly that Iran now wants more than Obama gave. He wouldn’t be publicizing this if he didn’t think it was achievable with Trump. He also said:

Iran currently operates one reactor at the Bushehr nuclear power plant. Our long-standing game plan is to build at least 19 more reactors, meaning that tens of billions of dollars in potential contracts are up for grabs. The Iranian market alone is big enough to revitalize the struggling nuclear industry in the United States.

Wow. Consider:

1. Oil-rich Iran is planning an ambitious expansion of its “civilian only” nuclear program. Its current levels of uranium enrichment are already blasting past needs for civilian purposes.
2. Iran expects foreign investment from companies involved in nuclear technology, construction and related services. No more sanctions or pariah status.
3. Araghchi has the temerity to suggest that struggling America would benefit from investing in Iranian nuclear energy. If President Trump hoped to strike fear in Iran by threatening to open the gates of hell against it, it did not work.

There were rumblings that part of Iran’s negotiating platform was to get U.S. assistance in building its nuclear program. This seems to confirm the rumors.

Meanwhile, this news came in from the UN’s atomic watchdog:

Iran is “not far” from being able to produce a nuclear bomb, the head of the International Atomic Energy Agency said yesterday. Rafael Grossi specifically highlighted Iran having amassed enough highly enriched uranium (about 275 kilograms at 60 percent purity, close to weapons-grade 90 percent) to create several nuclear warheads if further enriched. The IAEA has repeatedly expressed concerns about Iran’s lack of transparency and limited cooperation, such as disrupted surveillance and barred inspectors.

And while President Trump seeks to strike a deal with Iran, he plans to draw down America’s presence elsewhere in the Mideast:

Trump is pulling U.S. troops out of Syria, citing the ouster of dictator Bashar Assad as justification, Ezekiel Malone reports. Over half of America’s troops will be withdrawn over the next few months.

Another rejection for Trump: EU defied a demand from America’s president that it decouple from China as a condition for reaching a trade deal with the U.S. Yesterday the European Commission announced that this isn’t going to happen. Trump wants the world to choose sides between America and China. Bible prophecy shows that China is going to win that battle.

So it looks like Trump is ready to back down in the trade war: Yesterday, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent commented that the high tariffs were “unsustainable” and said a “deescalation” in the trade war is expected. Then President Trump told reporters that he “won’t play hardball with China” in making a trade deal. “We’re gonna be very nice, they’re gonna be very nice, and we’ll see what happens,” he said, indicating that the 145 percent tariff on China will drop significantly.

Axios reported yesterday that what changed the president’s mind was a warning from the CEOs of Walmart, Target and Home Depot that his tariff and trade policies could disrupt supply chains, raise prices, and lead to empty shelves in as little as two weeks. This came amid a serious market slump and other growing economic red flags.

America’s overdependence on an avaricious and unscrupulous China truly is a nation-threatening problem. Hopes that Trump would rectify it, though the cost would be steep, are rapidly dimming. If all the disruption and chaos of the last month has been part of the “art of the deal,” it is dealing that comes with considerable collateral damage.

Polls now show that, for the first time since Trump entered politics, most voters disapprove of how he is handling the economy.

Chinese spies in Taiwan: Taiwan is cracking down on government staff traveling to China after discovering numerous spies working in the government, Ezekiel Malone writes.

China and Indonesia agreed to deepen strategic and defense cooperation at a meeting of foreign and defense ministers on Monday, our In Brief reports. Both are united in opposing U.S. tariffs.

And China called on Japan to lay aside their differences in a joint response to U.S. tariffs, Peter van Halteren writes.

Spain will accelerate its defense spending spree, Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez announced yesterday. It will meet NATO’s target of 2 percent of GDP by the end of this year—four years ahead of its original 2029 goal. This €10.5 billion cash infusion will fund telecommunications, cybersecurity, military equipment and troop salary increases. Spain has been the lowest NATO spender—last year it spent 1.28 percent of its GDP on defense. Yet another nation joins Europe’s rapid militarization, contributing to the global arms race.

Russian cyberattack on Europe: Dutch authorities reported a Russian cyberattack occurred last year on a public facility, but the attack was unsuccessful, our In Brief reports.

Eight petroleum-based synthetic food dyes will be banned in the U.S. by January 2027, the Food and Drug Administration announced yesterday. The order cites studies linking synthetic dyes to issues like ADHD in some children. However, the plan relies on voluntary industry compliance rather than an outright ban. The food industry, including the International Association of Color Manufacturers, argues that the dyes are safe and that reformulation could disrupt supply chains. Is there nothing we can all agree on? Truly, every effort to confront even obvious problems faces serious pushback from somewhere.