Why does the White House strongly deny the release of a draft by Iran regarding the progress of the US Iran negotiations? Both sides are competing for favorable terms and attempting to pressure each other through public opinion and market influence. Discuss personal opinions. Last night, Iranian media released a draft agreement stating that if the US and Iran reach an agreement, the commercial shipping flow in Hormuz may return to pre war levels within a month. After this news came out, oil prices fell first. But soon, the White House denied this claim. Trump's tone has not softened either. He said that Hormuz is an international waterway that must be open to everyone; The United States will not accept a short-term agreement, nor is it prepared to relax sanctions, release Iran's overseas frozen funds, or allow other major powers to take over Iran's highly enriched uranium inventory. 1. Why did Iran release a draft last night and what was its intention? 1) Test market and international community response. Iran announced the resumption of commercial shipping within a month, causing an immediate drop in oil prices, indicating that the market is very willing to trade for 'cooling down the war'. This puts pressure on the United States: if the US denies or continues military action, it will be seen by the market and allies as the party hindering the decline in oil prices. 2) Pre shape the agreement text as' Iran has not surrendered '. The most sensitive part of the draft is not "restoring shipping", but "Iran and Oman cooperating to manage cross-strait traffic" and "excluding warships". The explanation for Iran's domestic situation is that we can allow commercial ships to depart, but it is not the United States forcing us to open up, but rather restoring passage within Iran's sovereignty/regional management framework. 3) Post the nuclear issue. According to a follow-up report by Reuters, the draft disclosed by Iran's national television did not mention Iran's nuclear program, and the United States hopes to dismantle Iran's nuclear capabilities; Iranian sources suggest that the nuclear issue should be placed in the second round of negotiations, which may not satisfy the hardliners within Trump's camp. So Iran's strategy is to first discuss Hormuz, blockade, funding, and navigation; Put the nuclear issue into the 60 day follow-up window. The US strategy is exactly the opposite: it can talk about the strait, but it must also obtain a verifiable commitment of 'nuclear victory'. 2. Why is the White House strongly opposed? 1) It aims to prevent the market, media, and Iran from mistaking the 'informal draft' for 'accepted by the United States'. If the draft is circulated according to the Iranian version, the United States will passively accept "withdrawal, lifting of blockade, Iran Oman management of the strait, and exclusion of warships". These terms are difficult to explain to hawks within the United States, Israel, and some Gulf allies. 2) Trump does not want Iran to feel that it can "win" by oil prices and the pressure of the US mid-term elections. AP reported that Trump said at the cabinet meeting that Iran thought it could wait until after the US mid-term elections, but he did not care about the mid-term elections; AP also wrote that what Trump wants is an outcome that can not only reopen Hormuz, but also prove that Iran's nuclear capability has been greatly weakened. 3) The United States wants to reject the narrative that 'Hormuz is managed by Iran/Oman'. Trump clearly said that Holmuz is an international water area and no country can control it; Moved to the TV station and reported that Trump even used threatening language against Oman, and said that the US State Department subsequently forwarded the transcript containing "Oman", indicating that this was not a simple slip of tongue. In other words, what the White House denies is not that the US and Iran are in talks, but rather that the Iranian version of the agreement framework has been accepted by the US. 3. The current state Now it seems more like both sides are playing a game to find the most advantageous agreement for themselves: On the one hand, they all hope that the war will end soon; On the other hand, they also need to account for domestic political pressure. 1) Iran wants asset unfreezing, relaxed sanctions, oil exports, and maritime passage rights. 2) The United States wants freedom of movement in Hormuz, highly enriched uranium processing, nuclear program restrictions, and cannot allow Iran to turn the strait into a toll and review tool. The sharp drop in oil prices indicates that the market believes the worst-case risk of losing control in the strait is decreasing. The statements of the White House and Trump also showed that the real terms had not been discussed. 4. How will it evolve in the future? 1) Small scale friction and small-scale "fighting while talking" are already underway, and the US military may continue to conduct limited strikes on drones, missile positions, mine laying ships, and radar/command stations; Iran will continue to use the Revolutionary Guard Navy, drones, licensing system, and proxy front lines to exert pressure. Both sides do not want to completely kill the negotiations, so they will try their best to package military actions as "defensive", "limited", and "maintaining the ceasefire". The comprehensive upgrade is not a baseline scenario within the personal framework, and the core is that there is not much comparison of willingness between both parties. Of course, we must be cautious of the risk of a comprehensive upgrade 2) Still maintaining the previous discussion, it is increasingly likely that the US and Iran will reach the ceasefire model of last year's US China trade war that was discussed yesterday. Just the time and rhythm are not clear. Now it's not just a diplomatic game, but a four line simultaneous game of "diplomatic texts+oil price pressure+military confrontation+domestic politics". What Iran wants is: lifting the blockade, releasing funds, retaining the Hormuz management narrative, retaining nuclear rights, and avoiding being seen as surrendering domestically. What the United States wants is: unconditional opening of Hormuz, no fees, no control by Iran or Oman, verifiable disposal of Iran's nuclear stockpile, and no victory model for Iran to exchange money by sealing the strait. What the Gulf countries want is: no more fighting, no more bombing of energy facilities, no more turning the strait into an Iranian toll station, and no more being forcefully pulled into normalizing trade with Israel by Trump. So, in the short term, it is most likely not a sudden peace or a full-scale war, but a limited agreement attempt under high pressure. As we discussed a few days ago, the ball is already in the penalty area, but there is still a melee in front of the goal. Approaching a framework, but both sides are still vying for the power to interpret key terms, and militarily entering a high-pressure stage of "fighting while negotiating". This article is sponsored by @ bitget_zh, titled 'Bitget Buying US Stocks: Instant Entry, Smooth Trading'