2026-06-08T04:00:08.097Z / 美国有线电视新闻网（CNN）
- 曾与伊朗谈判人质释放的美国前外交官解释了为何目前围绕霍尔木兹海峡的谈判陷入僵局。
- 伊朗要求获得240亿美元冻结资产以重新开放这条至关重要的航运航道，将此事视为人质谈判。
- 华盛顿面临三种选择：承受经济压力、接受德黑兰的要价，或寻求军事控制该海峡。
本文由AI生成的摘要经CNN编辑审核。
布雷特·麦古克是CNN全球事务分析师，曾在乔治·W·布什、巴拉克·奥巴马、唐纳德·特朗普和乔·拜登四位总统任内担任高级国家安全职位。
随着唐纳德·特朗普总统寻求重新开放霍尔木兹海峡并遏制伊朗的核野心，华盛顿与德黑兰看似正在进行一场常规谈判。
但实际上，双方可能正在参与两场截然不同的谈判。
华盛顿往往从实力的角度看待与伊朗的谈判，而德黑兰则从占有权的角度看待谈判。
华盛顿的目标是通过经济压力和制裁迫使伊朗屈服于其要求。德黑兰的目标则是在获取有价值的东西并拒绝归还后，迫使美国屈服。
我亲身体会过这一点。
在过去十年里，我曾两次参与与伊朗的漫长谈判，以解救被关押在德黑兰臭名昭著的埃文监狱的美国人质。
人质谈判会削弱实力优势。伊朗深谙此道。这也是自1979年革命以来，伊朗多次将人质作为与美国讨价还价的筹码的原因。
作为代表世界最强大国家的外交官，我手中没有任何东西能够扭转谈判桌上的实力失衡。我的对手掌握着我们想要的东西（人质），他们会一直扣押这些人质，直到我们准备好支付足够的代价。
实力远不如占有权重要。
除了人质营救行动，华盛顿除了商定好价格之外别无他法。
时间对伊朗有利。他们几乎没有紧迫感。他们的策略是等待人质受苦，同时向华盛顿施加越来越大的压力，迫使其确保人质获释。
通过这种方式，伊朗的影响力会随时间推移而增强——他们清楚这一点。
2023年9月，美国与伊朗达成协议，释放五名被非法关押在埃文监狱的美国人。谈判持续了数月之久。在美国同意释放几名经正当程序定罪后关押在美国监狱的伊朗人，并将60亿美元从韩国转移至卡塔尔后，谈判取得突破。
这60亿美元被存放在受限账户中，伊朗只能将其用于不受制裁的人道主义交易。伊朗坚持要求这笔资金从首尔转移至多哈，以便更容易动用。作为协议的一部分，美国通过财政部建立了监督机制，确保资金不会被挪用，且仅用于购买不受制裁的商品。
作为协调这项复杂安排的团队成员之一，我当时在接受《华盛顿邮报》记者杰森·雷扎扬采访时解释了这项协议的好处。杰森是另一名前人质，经过一年多的漫长谈判，我们在10年前成功将他释放。
三周后，即2023年10月7日，哈马斯制造了针对以色列的屠杀，杀害1200名以色列人并绑架251名人质。伊朗最高领袖在袭击发生时公开赞扬了这些行动。华盛顿随后再次阻断了卡塔尔账户的资金使用，这一现状一直持续至今。
如今，伊朗似乎正在更大范围内应用类似的逻辑。它的“人质”不再是美国公民，而是全球最重要的经济动脉之一。
霍尔木兹海峡承担着全球约五分之一的石油贸易。伊朗通过威胁和使用武力——导弹和无人机——以及建立其所谓的由伊朗主导的新机构来计量进出航道的通行，实际上控制了该海峡。
对伊朗来说，这就是占有权。它现在掌握着美国（乃至全世界）想要的东西。除非美国支付高昂的代价，否则它不会放弃。在德黑兰看来，这条海峡如今已成为它所掌握过的最有价值的“人质”。
CNN记者弗雷德·普莱滕对伊朗新最高领袖的军事顾问穆赫辛·雷扎伊的独家采访让我深有感触。这次采访让我不寒而栗，因为它让我回想起在人质谈判中与伊朗安全官员对峙的场景。
雷扎伊表示，除非华盛顿解冻240亿美元的伊朗冻结资产，否则海峡仍将处于关闭状态。“你们必须释放这些资金，”他说，“如果特朗普认真对待谈判……这240亿美元是信任的考验，是美国必须通过的考验。”
他的公式很简单：给我们钱，否则你们得不到想要的东西——以及我们所掌握的东西。雷扎伊要求的这笔款项包括2023年人质协议中涉及的60亿美元。这一点颇具启示意义。对伊朗而言，当前的谈判似乎又是一场人质谈判——只不过这一次，“人质”是全球经济，初始要价是此前的四倍。
本届政府试图通过自身的经济压力扭转伊朗的影响力。特朗普通过封锁伊朗港口来阻止伊朗石油出口，试图让伊朗付出的代价超过德黑兰认为从长期对峙中可能获得的任何好处。
这一策略合乎逻辑。伊朗国内的经济影响将在未来数周和数月内加剧。多数指标显示，该国正濒临经济崩溃，面临恶性通货膨胀和数十亿美元政府薪资所需收入的损失。
但经济困境和伊朗民众的苦难可能不会打动德黑兰的新领导层。雷扎伊代表着伊朗伊斯兰共和国的强硬派，他的世界观如今似乎在德黑兰占据上风——与他一同的还有伊斯兰革命卫队新任总司令艾哈迈德·瓦希迪，后者据称控制着海峡的通行权。正是这些领导人现在掌控着局面（名副其实）。
周日，伊朗发动了自4月初停火以来首次针对以色列的导弹袭击，标志着在数周谈判后局势再次升级。
德黑兰认为，特朗普无法承受全球范围内的宏观经济压力，其忍耐时间将超过伊朗承受美国封锁的时间。特朗普多次预测协议即将达成，这可能只会强化伊朗的信念：即特朗普比德黑兰更迫切需要达成一项协议。
在军事方面，美国或许仍可试图掌控局势，确保这条国际航道的安全。“自由计划”曾尝试过这一点，但仅持续了一天。特朗普曾猜测可能会推出“升级版自由计划”，但伊朗威胁称，即使美国的封锁持续下去，伊朗也会反击。
正如雷扎伊在CNN采访中所言：“如果不解除海上封锁，我们将把战争拖至印度洋、曼德海峡、红海和地中海。”
换句话说，如果你试图与我们作战，我们就会劫持更多“人质”。曼德海峡控制着全球近10%的海运贸易。
这就是谈判陷入僵局且看不到突破迹象的原因。
华盛顿的问题是，通过调解人进行文字交换后，何时能达成协议。德黑兰的问题很简单：特朗普是否会支付他们要求的代价。
这是典型的人质谈判态势。
对华盛顿而言，三个选项几周来一直没有变化：
承受： 试图挺过宏观经济压力和不断上涨的汽油价格，随着德黑兰国内经济困境加剧，等待某个遥远且不确定的转折点。
让步： 预先向伊朗支付数十亿美元，以换取恢复战前现状——考虑到最初的既定目标，这对特朗普而言是一次屈辱的撤退。
开战： 寻求军事控制海峡，并在伊朗境内重启大规模军事行动，风险是伊朗随后会寻求将战争扩大到其他战线。
对德黑兰而言，计算方式更简单：坚守资产，等待时机。
这就是与掌握你所需之物的一方进行谈判的困境。
除非影响力发生变化，否则伊朗不会轻易放弃——谈判也将如今天这般：陷入僵局。
The ultimate hostage negotiation: Why Iran talks are deadlocked
2026-06-08T04:00:08.097Z / CNN
- A former US diplomat who negotiated hostage releases with Iran explains why current talks over the Strait of Hormuz are deadlocked.
- Iran is demanding $24 billion in frozen assets to reopen the vital shipping lane, treating it like a hostage negotiation.
- Washington faces three options: endure economic pressure, pay Tehran’s price or seek military control of the strait.
AI-generated summary was reviewed by a CNN editor.
Brett McGurk is a CNN global affairs analyst who served in senior national security positions under Presidents George W. Bush, Barack Obama, Donald Trump and Joe Biden.
As President Donald Trump searches for a way to reopen the Strait of Hormuz and curtail Iran’s nuclear ambitions, Washington and Tehran appear to be engaged in a standard negotiation.
In reality, they may be participating in two entirely different ones.
Washington tends to view negotiations with Iran through the lens of power. Tehran views them through the lens of possession.
Washington aims to force Iran to succumb to demands through economic pressure and sanctions. Tehran aims to force the US to succumb after acquiring something valuable and refusing to give it back.
I learned that lesson firsthand.
Twice over the last decade, I was involved in protracted negotiations with Iran for the release of American hostages held in Tehran’s notorious Evin Prison.
Hostage negotiations collapse power advantages. Iran understands this. It’s why Tehran, since the 1979 revolution, has repeatedly used hostages as bargaining chips with the US.
As a diplomat representing the most powerful country in the world, there was nothing in my hand to overcome the imbalance at the table. My counterparts possessed something we wanted (people), and they would hold onto it until we were prepared to pay a sufficient price.
Power mattered less than possession.
Short of a hostage rescue operation, there was nothing Washington could do outside of paying an agreed price.
Time favored the Iranians. They felt little urgency. Their strategy was to wait as hostages suffered and pressure mounted on Washington to secure their freedom.
In this way, Iran’s leverage increased over time — and they knew it.
In September 2023, the US struck a deal with Iran for the release of five Americans wrongfully held in Evin Prison. The talks had lasted months. The breakthrough came after the US agreed to free several Iranians held — after due process and convictions — in American prisons together with the transfer of $6 billion from South Korea to Qatar.
The $6 billion was held in restricted accounts available to Iran only for non-sanctioned humanitarian transactions. Iran insisted the funds move from Seoul to Doha, where they would be easier to access. As part of the deal, the US established oversight mechanisms through the Treasury Department to ensure no diversion and spending only on non-sanctioned goods.
As part of the team that coordinated this complex arrangement, I explained its merits at the time in an interview with Washington Post journalist Jason Rezaian. Jason was another former hostage whom we managed to set free 10 years earlier after a year of protracted talks.
Three weeks later, on October 7, 2023, Hamas massacred 1,200 Israelis and kidnapped 251 hostages. Iran’s supreme leader publicly praised the attacks as they were unfolding. Washington responded by denying access to the Qatar funds once again, a status quo that remains to this day.
Today, Iran appears to be applying a similar logic on a much larger scale. Its hostage is no longer an American citizen. It is one of the world’s most important economic arteries.
The Strait of Hormuz handles roughly one-fifth of global petroleum trade. Iran is effectively controlling it through threats and use of force — missiles and drones — and establishment of what it says is a new Iranian-led authority to meter access in and out.
For Iran, this is possession. It now has something the US (and for that matter, the rest of the world) wants. And it will not give it up unless and until America pays an exorbitant price. In Tehran’s eyes, the strait has now become the most valuable hostage it has ever possessed.
All of this was brought home by CNN’s Fred Pleitgen’s extraordinary interview with Mohsen Rezaei, military adviser to Iran’s new supreme leader. The interview gave me chills because it brought flashbacks to sitting across from Iran’s security officials in a hostage negotiation.
Rezaei stated the strait remains shut unless and until Washington releases $24 billion in frozen Iranian assets. “You must release them,” he said. “If Trump takes the negotiation seriously … this $24 billion is a test of trust. It’s a test America must pass.”
His formula is simple: Give us the money or you don’t get what you want — and what we possess. The sum Rezaei is demanding includes the $6 billion at the center of the 2023 hostage deal. This is revealing. For Iran, the current talks appear to be another hostage negotiation — except this time, the hostage is the global economy, and the opening demand is four times larger.
The administration has attempted to reverse Iran’s leverage through economic pressure of its own. By stopping Iranian oil exports through a blockade of Iran’s ports, Trump has sought to create costs that outweigh whatever benefits Tehran believes it might derive from a prolonged standoff.
The strategy is logical. The economic impact inside Iran will compound over the following weeks and months. By most indicators, the country is on the verge of an economic collapse with hyper-inflation and loss of billions of dollars in revenues needed to pay government salaries.
But economic pain and the suffering of Iran’s people likely won’t move the new leaders in Tehran. Rezaei represents the hardcore of the Islamic Republic, and his worldview now appears to be ascendent in Tehran — together with Ahmad Vahidi, the new head of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, which purports to control access to the strait. These are the leaders now calling the shots (literally).
On Sunday, Iran launched its first missile attack targeting Israel since an early April ceasefire, marking a fresh escalation after weeks of negotiations.
Tehran believes that Trump cannot withstand the macroeconomic pressure imposed on the world longer than Iran can withstand pressure from the US blockade. Trump’s repeated predictions that a deal is near may only reinforce Iran’s belief that Trump needs an agreement far more urgently than Tehran does.
Militarily, the US might still seek to impose its control and secure the international route through the strait. This was tried in “Project Freedom,” which lasted only one day. It might be tried again — Trump has speculated about “Project Freedom Plus” — but Iran is threatening to fight back even if the US blockade simply remains in place.
As Rezaei stated on CNN: “If the naval blockade is not lifted, we will drag the war to the Indian Ocean, the Bab el-Mandeb Strait, the Red Sea and the Mediterranean.”
In other words, if you try to fight us, we’ll take more hostages. The Bab el-Mandeb Strait controls nearly 10% of all seaborne trade.
This is why the talks are stuck and there is no breakthrough in sight.
The question in Washington is when a deal might be concluded following exchanges of texts through mediators. The question in Tehran is simply whether Trump will pay the price they are demanding.
It’s the classic dynamic of a hostage negotiation.
For Washington, the three options remain what they’ve been for weeks:
Endure:Seek to outlast the macro pressure and rising gasoline prices as economic pain compounds inside Tehran to some distant and uncertain breaking point.
Concede: Pay the up-front cost with billions to Iran in exchange for a return to status quo before the war — a humiliating retreat for Trump given the stated objectives at the outset.
Fight:Seek to control the strait militarily and renew major operations inside Iran, with risk that Tehran then seeks to expand the war to other fronts.
For Tehran, the calculation is simpler: hold the asset and wait.
This is the dilemma of negotiating with a party that possesses what you want back.
Unless and until the leverage changes, Iran will not surrender it cheaply — and talks will remain as today: deadlocked.