This is what could happen next after an Israel-Iran ceasefire

1 / 2
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu (L), Iran's Supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei (C) and US President Donald Trump (R). (AFP file photo)
2 / 2
U.S. Vice Admiral Charles Cooper II, nominated to be admiral and Commander of United States Central Command, testifies before a Senate Armed Services Committee confirmation hearing on Capitol Hill in Washington, D.C., U.S., June 24, 2025. (REUTERS)
Short Url
Updated 25 June 2025
Follow

This is what could happen next after an Israel-Iran ceasefire

  • Vice Admiral Brad Cooper, deputy commander of US Central Command, who has been nominated to lead forces in the Middle East, told lawmakers Tuesday that Iran still possesses “significant tactical capability” despite the American strikes
  • In response to a question about whether the Iranians still pose a threat to US troops and Americans worldwide, Cooper replied, “They do”

WASHINGTON: The whipsaw chain of events involving Iran, Israel and the United States that culminated in a surprise ceasefire has raised many questions about how the Trump administration will approach the Middle East going forward.
Yet, the answer to the bottom line question — “what’s next?” — remains unknowable and unpredictable. That is because President Donald Trump has essentially sidelined the traditional US national security apparatus and confined advice and decision-making to a very small group of top aides operating from the White House.
While there is uncertainty about whether the ceasefire between Iran and Israel will hold, it opens the possibility of renewed talks with Tehran over its nuclear program and reinvigorating stalled negotiations in other conflicts.
Watching for next steps on Trump’s social media
Outside experts, long consulted by presidential administrations on policy, have been forced like the general public to follow Trump’s social media musings and pronouncements for insights on his thinking or the latest turn of events.
Even Congress does not appear to be in the loop as top members were provided only cursory notifications of Trump’s weekend decision to hit three Israeli nuclear facilities and briefings on their impact scheduled for Tuesday were abruptly postponed.
State Department spokeswoman Tammy Bruce, whose agency has played a key role in formulating Iran policy for decades, repeatedly on Tuesday deferred questions to the White House and Trump’s posts.
“The secretary of state was in a dynamic with the president that is a private dynamic as that team was addressing a war and the nature of how to stop it,” she told reporters. “I can’t speak to how that transpired or the decisions that were made.”
Trump’s announcement Monday that Israel and Iran agreed to a ceasefire took many in the administration by surprise — as did his post Tuesday that China is now free to import Iranian oil.
It’s an apparent 180-degree shift from Trump’s “maximum pressure campaign” on Iran since he withdrew from the 2015 Iran nuclear agreement during his first term. US officials were left wondering if that meant wide-ranging sanctions aimed at cutting off Iran’s energy revenue were being eased or reversed.
Assessing the damage to Iran’s nuclear program
While the extent of the damage from 11 days of Israeli attacks and Saturday’s strikes by US bunker-buster bombs is not yet fully known, a preliminary assessment from the Defense Intelligence Agency said the nuclear program had been set back only a few months and was not “completely and fully obliterated” as Trump has said.
According to people familiar with the report, it found that while the strikes at the Fordo, Natanz and Isfahan nuclear sites did significant damage, they were not totally destroyed.
Still, most experts believe the facilities will require months or longer to repair or reconstruct if Iran chooses to try to maintain its program at previous levels.
Vice Admiral Brad Cooper, deputy commander of US Central Command, who has been nominated to lead forces in the Middle East, told lawmakers Tuesday that Iran still possesses “significant tactical capability” despite the American strikes. He pointed to Iran’s attempt to retaliate with missile launches at a US base in Qatar.
In response to a question about whether the Iranians still pose a threat to US troops and Americans worldwide, Cooper replied, “They do.”
Trump, after announcing the ceasefire, boasted that Iran will never again have a nuclear program.
However, there are serious questions about whether Iran’s leadership, which has placed a high premium on maintaining its nuclear capabilities, will be willing to negotiate them away.
Restarting US-Iran nuclear talks is possible
Another major question is what happens with negotiations over Iran’s nuclear program. It is not entirely clear who in Iran has the authority to make a deal or even agree to reenter talks with the US or others.
Ray Takeyh, a former State Department official and senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations, said Iranian leadership is at a moment of disarray — making it difficult to return to the table.
“The country’s leadership and the regime is not cohesive enough to be able to come to some sort of negotiations at this point, especially negotiations from the American perspective, whose conclusion is predetermined, namely, zero enrichment,” he said.
Karim Sadjadpour, an Iran expert at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, agreed, saying that “the biggest challenge right now is who is in charge in Tehran.”
“Is there an Iranian negotiation team empowered to make consequential decisions?” he said. “The issue is that (Trump) is dealing with an Iranian government whose longtime identity has been based on hostility toward the the United States.”
Still, a US official said Tuesday that special envoy Steve Witkoff is ready to resume negotiations if Trump tells him to and Iran is willing. The official spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss sensitive diplomatic matters.
Witkoff has maintained an open line of direct communication via text messages with Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi.
In the aftermath of the US strikes, Vice President JD Vance and Secretary of State Marco Rubio both stressed that diplomacy is still Trump’s preferred method for ending the conflict permanently.
“We didn’t blow up the diplomacy,” Vance told NBC’s “Meet the Press” on Sunday. “The diplomacy never was given a real chance by the Iranians. And our hope … is that this maybe can reset here. The Iranians have a choice. They can go down the path of peace or they can go down the path of this ridiculous brinksmanship.”
Rubio echoed those comments.
“We’re prepared right now, if they call right now and say we want to meet, let’s talk about this, we’re prepared to do that,” he said. “The president’s made that clear from the very beginning: His preference is to deal with this issue diplomatically.”
The Israel-Iran ceasefire could affect Trump’s approach to other conflicts
If it holds, the ceasefire could offer insight to the Trump administration as it tries to broker peace in several other significant conflicts with ties to Iran.
An end — even a temporary one — to the Iran-Israel hostilities may allow the administration to return to talks with mediators like Egypt and Qatar to seek an end to the war between Israel and the Iranian-backed militant group Hamas.
In Syria, a further shift away from now-weakened Iranian influence — pervasive during ousted leader Bashar Assad’s reign — could open new doors for US-Syria cooperation. Trump already has met the leader of the new Syrian government and eased US sanctions.
Similarly, tense US relations with Lebanon also could benefit from a reduced Iranian role in supporting the Hezbollah militant group, which has been a force of its own — rivaling if not outperforming the Lebanese Armed Forces, particularly near the Israeli border.
If an Iran-Israel ceasefire holds, it also could allow Trump the time and space to return to stalled efforts to broker a ceasefire between Russia and Ukraine.
Russia and Iran have substantial economic and military cooperation, including Tehran providing Moscow with drones that the Russian military has relied on heavily in its war against Ukraine.
Russia has stepped up attacks on Ukraine in recent days as Israel attacked sites in Iran, perhaps expecting the world’s attention to shift away from its three-year-old invasion.

 


NGOs fear ‘catastrophic impact’ of new Israel registration rules

Updated 3 sec ago
Follow

NGOs fear ‘catastrophic impact’ of new Israel registration rules

  • NGOs working in Israel and occupied Palestinian territories have until December 31 to register under the new framework
  • Save the Children is among the charities already barred under the new rules
PARIS: New rules in Israel for registering non-governmental organizations, under which more than a dozen groups have already been rejected, could have a catastrophic impact on aid work in Gaza and the West Bank, relief workers warn.
The NGOs have until December 31 to register under the new framework, which Israel says aims not to impede aid distribution but to prevent “hostile actors or supporters of terrorism” operating in the Palestinian territories.
The controversy comes with Gaza, which lacks running water and electricity, still battling a humanitarian crisis even after the US-brokered October ceasefire in the war between Israel and Hamas, sparked by the Palestinian militant group’s October 7, 2023 attack on Israel.
Israel’s Ministry of Diaspora Affairs and Combating Antisemitism told AFP that, as of November 2025, approximately 100 registration requests had been submitted and “only 14 organization requests have been rejected... The remainder have been approved or are currently under review.”
Requests are rejected for “organizations involved in terrorism, antisemitism, delegitimization of Israel, Holocaust denial, denial of the crimes of October 7,” it said.

‘Very problematic’

The amount of aid entering Gaza remains inadequate. While the October 10 ceasefire agreement stipulated the entry of 600 trucks per day, only 100 to 300 are carrying humanitarian aid, according to NGOs and the United Nations.
The NGOs barred under the new rules include Save the Children, one of the best known and oldest in Gaza, where it helps 120,000 children, and the American Friends Service Committee (AFSC).
They are being given 60 days to withdraw all their international staff from the Gaza Strip, the occupied West Bank and Israel, and will no longer be able to send humanitarian supplies across the border to Gaza.
In Gaza, Save the Children’s local staff and partners “remain committed to providing crucial services for children,” such as psychosocial support and education, a spokeswoman told AFP.
The forum that brings together UN agencies and NGOs working in the area on Thursday issued a statement urging Israel to “lift all impediments,” including the new registration process, that “risk the collapse of the humanitarian response.”
The Humanitarian Country Team of the Occupied Palestinian Territory (HCT) warned that dozens of NGOs face deregistration and that, while some had been registered, “these NGOs represent only a fraction of the response in Gaza and are nowhere near the number required just to meet immediate and basic needs.”
“The deregistration of NGOs in Gaza will have a catastrophic impact on access to essential and basic services,” it said.
NGOs contacted by AFP, several of whom declined to be quoted on the record due to the sensitivity of the issue, say they complied with most of Israel’s requirements to provide a complete dossier.
Some, however, refused to cross what they described as a “red line” of providing information about their Palestinian staff.
“After speaking about genocide, denouncing the conditions under which the war was being waged and the restrictions imposed on the entry of aid, we tick all the boxes” to fail the registration, predicted the head of one NGO.
“Once again, bureaucratic pressure is being used for political control, with catastrophic consequences,” said the relief worker.
Rights groups and NGOs including Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch have accused Israel of carrying out a genocide against Palestinians in Gaza, a term vehemently rejected by the Israeli government.
“If NGOs are considered to be harmful for passing on testimonies from populations, carrying out operational work and saying what is happening and this leads to a ban on working, then this is very problematic,” said Jean-Francois Corty, president of French NGO Medecins du Monde.

- ‘Every little criticism’ -

The most contentious requirement for the NGOs is to prove they do not work for the “delegitimization” of Israel, a term that appears related to calling into question Israel’s right to exist but which aid workers say is dangerously vague.
“Israel sees every little criticism as a reason to deny their registration... We don’t even know what delegitimization actually means,” said Yotam Ben-Hillel, an Israeli lawyer who is assisting several NGOs with the process and has filed legal appeals.
He said the applications of some NGOs had already been turned down on these grounds.
“So every organization that operates in Gaza and the West Bank and sees what happens and reports on that could be declared as illegal now, because they just report on what they see,” he told AFP.
With the December 31 deadline looming, concerns focus on what will happen in early 2026 if the NGOs that are selected lack the capacity and expertise of organizations with a long-standing presence.
Several humanitarian actors told AFP they had “never heard of” some of the accredited NGOs, which currently have no presence in Gaza but were reportedly included in Trump’s plan for Gaza.
“The United States is starting from scratch, and with the new registration procedure, some NGOs will leave,” said a European diplomatic source in the region, asking not to be named. “They might wake up on January 1 and realize there is no-one to replace them.”