Iran War: Phantom Negotiations, Real Escalation
This is a developing story.
The US war on Iran is entering its fifth week in a fog of contradictions. President Trump has extended his ultimatum to Iran over the Strait of Hormuz blockade for a second time, pushing the deadline to April 6, while simultaneously claiming that "very good and productive conversations" are taking place with Iranian negotiators. Tehran flatly denies any talks are happening. Iran's Foreign Ministry spokesman Esmaeil Baghaei, in an exclusive interview with Zeteo's Mehdi Hasan, called Trump's claim that Iranian negotiators are "begging" for a deal "insane," adding that a deal had been "within reach" during last month's Geneva nuclear negotiations before the US walked away.
On the ground, the escalation is concrete. The Wall Street Journal reports that the Pentagon is considering sending 10,000 additional ground troops to the region, with US bases already under attack by Iranian forces. The IRGC claims to have shot down a US F/A-18 over Chabahar. Israel says it killed an IRGC naval commander, while Iran struck a chemical complex in the Negev linked to white phosphorus production. Israel's Iron Dome is showing significant weaknesses under sustained Iranian fire, a marked evolution from Iran's capabilities during the 2025 summer conflict. Meanwhile, Iran has established what experts describe as a "toll system" for ships transiting the Strait of Hormuz, with legislation under way to formalize these fees.
The diplomatic picture is equally chaotic. A Zeteo analysis of Trump's public statements reveals staggering contradictions: his estimates of how close Iran was to a nuclear weapon shifted from "within a month" to "two weeks" within 24 hours. A reported 15-point peace plan, reportedly delivered via Pakistani intermediaries, appears to recycle demands already rejected before the war began. A new hardliner, Revolutionary Guard co-founder Mohammad Bagher Zolghadr, has been appointed to lead Iran's National Security Council, signaling Tehran's intent to dig in.
In Washington, the House War Powers Resolution vote has been stalled by Democrats themselves. Rep. Greg Meeks, the ranking Democrat on Foreign Affairs, is postponing the vote until mid-April, fearing he would lose. Republican supporters like Warren Davidson and Nancy Mace have said they would vote to declare the war unconstitutional, meaning the resolution could pass if it reached the floor. Congress now enters a two-week recess with no vote on record. Iraq's government has formally backed the Iranian resistance after multiple deadly US strikes on its soil, invoking a "right of self-defense." Iran is pushing to include Lebanon in any ceasefire deal, even as Lebanon expelled the Iranian ambassador following an Israeli-intercepted Iranian missile landing on Lebanese territory.
Sources:
tagesschau.de,
tagesschau.de,
Zeteo,
Zeteo,
Zeteo,
Drop Site News,
Drop Site News,
taz,
taz,
taz,
junge Welt,
junge Welt,
taz,
taz,
taz,
tagesschau.de,
tagesschau.de,
Jacobin
EU Parliament Kills Chat Control in Privacy Victory
The European Parliament has rejected the mass surveillance of private messages by tech companies, effectively ending the EU's "chat control" regime. The derogation that allowed platforms like WhatsApp and Instagram to scan chats for child sexual abuse material will expire on April 4 and will not be renewed. The vote marks the conclusion of a years-long battle between privacy advocates and surveillance proponents in Brussels.
The result came after extraordinary parliamentary drama. The conservative EVP faction attempted an unusual procedural maneuver to reverse a March 11 vote that had already struck down indiscriminate scanning in favor of targeted, suspicion-based measures. The EVP forced a re-vote, stretching parliamentary rules to their limits, but the gambit failed. The Parliament confirmed its position with a broad majority, rejecting both the Council's position and the Commission's extension proposal. As netzpolitik.org documented through classified protocols, the EU Council had deliberately allowed trilogue negotiations to collapse after the Parliament's privacy-friendly vote.
Patrick Breyer, the German MEP who led the campaign against chat control, called the result a victory for digital privacy that "clears the path for genuine child protection" through targeted surveillance and secure app design rather than blanket scanning. German Chancellor Merz expressed irritation at the outcome. The vote is significant beyond the immediate policy: it demonstrated that the Parliament can resist pressure from both the Commission and member state governments on fundamental rights questions, even when child protection is invoked as justification for mass surveillance.
EU Parliament Votes with Far Right for Hardline Asylum Policy
In a vote that the AfD called "another historic day," the European Parliament approved a dramatically hardened deportation framework, including provisions for "return hubs" — deportation centers outside the EU. The conservative EVP, led by CSU politician Manfred Weber, secured the majority by voting with far-right parties including the AfD, the Rassemblement National, and other radical-right groupings. It is the latest in a pattern of the supposed "firewall" against the far right crumbling on migration policy.
The new return directive gives member states sweeping latitude over deportations, including to third countries that did not agree to accept deportees. Critics point out that the framework lacks basic safeguards and effectively outsources Europe's asylum obligations. Die Linke MEP Ozlem Demirel condemned what she called an "Abschiebemaschinerie" (deportation machine), while the taz described the legislation as bearing "the handwriting of the radical right." The vote took place on the same day the Parliament rejected chat control, illustrating the contradictory currents within the chamber: willing to defend digital privacy rights while simultaneously dismantling protections for asylum seekers.
The vote is part of a broader rightward shift in European migration politics, where policies once proposed only by the far right have been adopted by the political center. The practical implementation of offshore deportation centers remains legally and logistically fraught, but the political signal is unmistakable: the EU mainstream has accepted the framing of migration as primarily a security problem requiring punitive responses rather than a humanitarian challenge.