7*24

Hot topic

Market

Activities

On April 9, White House Press Secretary Levitt stated at a press conference on the 8th that Iran's initially proposed 10-point suggestions are unacceptable and have been discarded. Iran subsequently presented a 'more reasonable and concise' plan that could serve as a basis for negotiations between the U.S. and Iran. Levitt mentioned that President Trump and his team believe this new proposal from Iran could be a viable foundation for negotiations and could align with the U.S. 15-point plan. She emphasized that Trump's 'red line' requiring Iran to cease uranium enrichment activities remains unchanged, and the notion that Trump would accept an 'wish list' type agreement from Iran is 'completely absurd'.

[White House: Iran's Initial 10-Point Proposal Unacceptable, New Plan Can Serve as Negotiation Basis]On April 9, White House Press Secretary Levitt stated at a press conference on the 8th that Iran's initially proposed 10-point suggestions are unacceptable and have been discarded. Iran subsequently presented a 'more reasonable and concise' plan that could serve as a basis for negotiations between the U.S. and Iran. Levitt mentioned that President Trump and his team believe this new proposal from Iran could be a viable foundation for negotiations and could align with the U.S. 15-point plan. She emphasized that Trump's 'red line' requiring Iran to cease uranium enrichment activities remains unchanged, and the notion that Trump would accept an 'wish list' type agreement from Iran is 'completely absurd'.

White House: Iran's Initial 10-Point Proposal Unacceptable, New Plan Can Serve as Negotiation Basis

On April 9, Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Baghaei posted a video on social media in which White House Press Secretary Levitt told reporters earlier today that Lebanon is not a participant in the two-week ceasefire agreement. Baghaei wrote alongside the short video: 'If this is not another example of the U.S. prematurely betraying its commitments, then what is?!' Baghaei also shared a post from Pakistani Prime Minister Sharif, which stated that Iran and the U.S. 'have agreed to an immediate ceasefire in all regions, including Lebanon.'

[Iran's Foreign Ministry Accuses U.S. of 'Prematurely Abandoning' Agreement Terms]On April 9, Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Baghaei posted a video on social media in which White House Press Secretary Levitt told reporters earlier today that Lebanon is not a participant in the two-week ceasefire agreement. Baghaei wrote alongside the short video: 'If this is not another example of the U.S. prematurely betraying its commitments, then what is?!' Baghaei also shared a post from Pakistani Prime Minister Sharif, which stated that Iran and the U.S. 'have agreed to an immediate ceasefire in all regions, including Lebanon.'

Iran's Foreign Ministry Accuses U.S. of 'Prematurely Abandoning' Agreement Terms

On April 9, U.S. Vice President Vance stated that the first ten-point proposal from Iran was, frankly, likely written by ChatGPT. This proposal was immediately discarded and rejected. There is a second, more reasonable ten-point proposal based on consultations between us and Pakistan. This is the proposal mentioned by the President, and it remains valid as of yesterday. Frankly, I have also seen a third ten-point proposal, which is even more extreme than the first one, and it has been circulating on various social media channels.

[Vance: Iran's Ten-Point Proposal Resembles AI Editing with Multiple Versions]On April 9, U.S. Vice President Vance stated that the first ten-point proposal from Iran was, frankly, likely written by ChatGPT. This proposal was immediately discarded and rejected. There is a second, more reasonable ten-point proposal based on consultations between us and Pakistan. This is the proposal mentioned by the President, and it remains valid as of yesterday. Frankly, I have also seen a third ten-point proposal, which is even more extreme than the first one, and it has been circulating on various social media channels.

Vance: Iran's Ten-Point Proposal Resembles AI Editing with Multiple Versions

On April 9, Nick Timiraos, often referred to as the 'Fed's mouthpiece,' stated that the ceasefire between the U.S. and Iran provides an opportunity to alleviate the severe threats to the global economy. However, for the Federal Reserve, this may simply replace one issue with another: the volatility of energy prices continues to exist, keeping inflation elevated, but not severe enough to significantly damage demand, leading to a prolonged period of unchanged interest rates. The minutes from the Fed's March meeting emphasized that the war is not the primary reason for the Fed's reluctance to cut rates; rather, it has made the Fed's already cautious stance even more complex. Even before the conflict, the path to rate cuts had narrowed. The labor market has stabilized, easing concerns about a recession, while progress toward the Fed's 2% inflation target has stalled. The Fed did not adjust interest rates at the March meeting partly due to concerns about the risks of a prolonged war. The risk that escalating conflict could hinder economic growth and lead to a recession had been the last and most compelling reason to support a resumption of rate cuts. Ironically, the end of the war may make it harder, rather than easier, for the Fed to implement easing policies in the short term. This is because the ceasefire agreement eliminates the worst economic conditions, namely severe price increases that disrupt supply chains and damage demand, which can be considered more important than removing the risks of new inflation pressures.

[Fed's Dilemma: Ceasefire Agreement Complicates Decision-Making]On April 9, Nick Timiraos, often referred to as the 'Fed's mouthpiece,' stated that the ceasefire between the U.S. and Iran provides an opportunity to alleviate the severe threats to the global economy. However, for the Federal Reserve, this may simply replace one issue with another: the volatility of energy prices continues to exist, keeping inflation elevated, but not severe enough to significantly damage demand, leading to a prolonged period of unchanged interest rates. The minutes from the Fed's March meeting emphasized that the war is not the primary reason for the Fed's reluctance to cut rates; rather, it has made the Fed's already cautious stance even more complex. Even before the conflict, the path to rate cuts had narrowed. The labor market has stabilized, easing concerns about a recession, while progress toward the Fed's 2% inflation target has stalled. The Fed did not adjust interest rates at the March meeting partly due to concerns about the risks of a prolonged war. The risk that escalating conflict could hinder economic growth and lead to a recession had been the last and most compelling reason to support a resumption of rate cuts. Ironically, the end of the war may make it harder, rather than easier, for the Fed to implement easing policies in the short term. This is because the ceasefire agreement eliminates the worst economic conditions, namely severe price increases that disrupt supply chains and damage demand, which can be considered more important than removing the risks of new inflation pressures.

Fed's Dilemma: Ceasefire Agreement Complicates Decision-Making

On April 9, the Speaker of the Iranian Parliament stated that three key provisions in the 10-point proposal had been violated before the negotiations were initiated. These include: 1. Non-compliance with the provision regarding a ceasefire in Lebanon outlined in the 10-point proposal—Pakistan's Prime Minister has explicitly mentioned and declared this as a 'comprehensive ceasefire effective immediately everywhere, including Lebanon and other regions'; 2. An invading drone entered Iranian airspace and was destroyed in the city of Laar in Fars Province, which clearly violates the terms prohibiting any further infringement of Iranian airspace; 3. Denial of Iran's rights to enrich uranium, which is included in Article 6 of the framework. Now, the 'feasible conditions' that should serve as the basis for negotiations have been openly and clearly undermined, even before the negotiations have begun. In this context, implementing a bilateral ceasefire or engaging in negotiations is unreasonable.

[Iranian Speaker: Three Key Provisions Violated Before Peace Negotiations Begin]On April 9, the Speaker of the Iranian Parliament stated that three key provisions in the 10-point proposal had been violated before the negotiations were initiated. These include: 1. Non-compliance with the provision regarding a ceasefire in Lebanon outlined in the 10-point proposal—Pakistan's Prime Minister has explicitly mentioned and declared this as a 'comprehensive ceasefire effective immediately everywhere, including Lebanon and other regions'; 2. An invading drone entered Iranian airspace and was destroyed in the city of Laar in Fars Province, which clearly violates the terms prohibiting any further infringement of Iranian airspace; 3. Denial of Iran's rights to enrich uranium, which is included in Article 6 of the framework. Now, the 'feasible conditions' that should serve as the basis for negotiations have been openly and clearly undermined, even before the negotiations have begun. In this context, implementing a bilateral ceasefire or engaging in negotiations is unreasonable.

Iranian Speaker: Three Key Provisions Violated Before Peace Negotiations Begin

On April 9, the minutes from the Federal Reserve's March meeting revealed that the number of officials hoping to signal a potential rate hike rather than a continuation of rate cuts has increased. The minutes stated: "Some participants believed there was sufficient reason to provide a two-way description of the Committee's future interest rate decisions in the post-meeting statement." In contrast, the January meeting minutes only mentioned that "a few" participants held this view. In the Fed's terminology, "some" refers to a larger number than "a few." Following the outbreak of the Iran war, Fed officials weighed different scenarios for the U.S. economy, including those that would necessitate rate cuts as well as those that might require rate hikes. The March FOMC meeting minutes, released on Wednesday, indicated that most officials were concerned that the war could impact the labor market, thereby necessitating lower interest rates. At the same time, many officials also emphasized inflation risks, which could ultimately require a response in the form of rate hikes. The minutes showed that an increasing number of officials suggested including relevant language in the post-meeting statement to mention the possibility of rate hikes under specific conditions.

[Fed Meeting Minutes: More Officials Mention Rate Hike Possibility, Decision-Makers Focus on Dual Risks of Iran War]On April 9, the minutes from the Federal Reserve's March meeting revealed that the number of officials hoping to signal a potential rate hike rather than a continuation of rate cuts has increased. The minutes stated: "Some participants believed there was sufficient reason to provide a two-way description of the Committee's future interest rate decisions in the post-meeting statement." In contrast, the January meeting minutes only mentioned that "a few" participants held this view. In the Fed's terminology, "some" refers to a larger number than "a few." Following the outbreak of the Iran war, Fed officials weighed different scenarios for the U.S. economy, including those that would necessitate rate cuts as well as those that might require rate hikes. The March FOMC meeting minutes, released on Wednesday, indicated that most officials were concerned that the war could impact the labor market, thereby necessitating lower interest rates. At the same time, many officials also emphasized inflation risks, which could ultimately require a response in the form of rate hikes. The minutes showed that an increasing number of officials suggested including relevant language in the post-meeting statement to mention the possibility of rate hikes under specific conditions.

Fed Meeting Minutes: More Officials Mention Rate Hike Possibility, Decision-Makers Focus on Dual Risks of Iran War

On April 9, the WSJ reported that Iran has informed mediators that it will limit the number of vessels passing through the Strait of Hormuz to about ten per day and will impose fees for passage. Arab mediators stated that vessels must coordinate with the Iranian Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps. According to S&P Global Market Intelligence data, only four vessels were granted passage on Wednesday, the lowest level since April. The approved vessels are currently navigating a corridor north of the usual shipping lanes, located between Iran's Qeshm Island and Larak Island, heading towards the Sea of Oman along the Iranian coast. Shipping operators noted that fees are typically determined a week in advance and are based on the size of the vessel, with costs for a very large crude carrier capable of carrying about 2 million barrels of oil reaching up to $2 million. Iran has also proposed sharing passage fees with Oman, but Oman has not yet agreed to this plan. According to the latest reports from Iran's Press TV, the Strait of Hormuz has been fully closed, forcing tankers to turn back.

[WSJ: Iran Limits Daily Traffic in the Strait to About Ten Vessels]On April 9, the WSJ reported that Iran has informed mediators that it will limit the number of vessels passing through the Strait of Hormuz to about ten per day and will impose fees for passage. Arab mediators stated that vessels must coordinate with the Iranian Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps. According to S&P Global Market Intelligence data, only four vessels were granted passage on Wednesday, the lowest level since April. The approved vessels are currently navigating a corridor north of the usual shipping lanes, located between Iran's Qeshm Island and Larak Island, heading towards the Sea of Oman along the Iranian coast. Shipping operators noted that fees are typically determined a week in advance and are based on the size of the vessel, with costs for a very large crude carrier capable of carrying about 2 million barrels of oil reaching up to $2 million. Iran has also proposed sharing passage fees with Oman, but Oman has not yet agreed to this plan. According to the latest reports from Iran's Press TV, the Strait of Hormuz has been fully closed, forcing tankers to turn back.

WSJ: Iran Limits Daily Traffic in the Strait to About Ten Vessels

On April 9, Nick Timiraos, a spokesperson for the Federal Reserve, stated that the ceasefire between the U.S. and Iran provides an opportunity to address the serious threats posed to the global economy. However, for the Federal Reserve, this may simply replace one issue with another: the volatility of energy prices continues to persist, keeping inflation at elevated levels, yet not severe enough to undermine demand, resulting in a prolonged period of unchanged interest rates. The minutes from the Fed's March meeting emphasized that the war is not the primary reason for the Fed's reluctance to cut rates, but rather has made the Fed's already cautious stance even more complex. Even before the conflict erupted, the path to rate cuts had narrowed. The labor market has stabilized, alleviating concerns about a recession, while progress towards the Fed's 2% inflation target has stalled. The Fed did not adjust interest rates in March, partly due to concerns about the risks associated with a prolonged war. The risk that escalating conflict could hinder economic growth and lead to a recession was the last and most compelling reason supporting a return to rate cuts. Ironically, the end of the war may make it more difficult, rather than easier, for the Fed to implement easing policies in the short term. This is because the ceasefire agreement eliminates the worst economic conditions, namely severe price increases that disrupt supply chains and damage demand, which can be considered more important than alleviating new inflationary pressures.

[Analysis: Ceasefire Agreement Complicates Fed's Decision-Making]On April 9, Nick Timiraos, a spokesperson for the Federal Reserve, stated that the ceasefire between the U.S. and Iran provides an opportunity to address the serious threats posed to the global economy. However, for the Federal Reserve, this may simply replace one issue with another: the volatility of energy prices continues to persist, keeping inflation at elevated levels, yet not severe enough to undermine demand, resulting in a prolonged period of unchanged interest rates. The minutes from the Fed's March meeting emphasized that the war is not the primary reason for the Fed's reluctance to cut rates, but rather has made the Fed's already cautious stance even more complex. Even before the conflict erupted, the path to rate cuts had narrowed. The labor market has stabilized, alleviating concerns about a recession, while progress towards the Fed's 2% inflation target has stalled. The Fed did not adjust interest rates in March, partly due to concerns about the risks associated with a prolonged war. The risk that escalating conflict could hinder economic growth and lead to a recession was the last and most compelling reason supporting a return to rate cuts. Ironically, the end of the war may make it more difficult, rather than easier, for the Fed to implement easing policies in the short term. This is because the ceasefire agreement eliminates the worst economic conditions, namely severe price increases that disrupt supply chains and damage demand, which can be considered more important than alleviating new inflationary pressures.

Analysis: Ceasefire Agreement Complicates Fed's Decision-Making

On April 9, Iranian news agency SNN reported that Iran's Ports and Maritime Organization announced on Wednesday the establishment of safe navigation routes in the Strait of Hormuz. Vessels must use these routes in coordination with the Iranian Revolutionary Guard. The agency stated that the safe entry route leads from the Gulf of Oman to the northern side of Larak Island, while the safe exit route from the Gulf requires passage south of Larak Island into the Gulf of Oman.

[Iran Establishes Safe Navigation Routes in the Strait of Hormuz, Requires Coordination for Vessels]On April 9, Iranian news agency SNN reported that Iran's Ports and Maritime Organization announced on Wednesday the establishment of safe navigation routes in the Strait of Hormuz. Vessels must use these routes in coordination with the Iranian Revolutionary Guard. The agency stated that the safe entry route leads from the Gulf of Oman to the northern side of Larak Island, while the safe exit route from the Gulf requires passage south of Larak Island into the Gulf of Oman.

Iran Establishes Safe Navigation Routes in the Strait of Hormuz, Requires Coordination for Vessels

under Musk's announcement of the establishment of the "American Party", a netizen asked him if his new party would participate in the 2026 midterm elections or the 2028 presidential election, Musk replied, "Next year".

[Musk responds to "running for election": next year]under Musk's announcement of the establishment of the "American Party", a netizen asked him if his new party would participate in the 2026 midterm elections or the 2028 presidential election, Musk replied, "Next year".

Musk responds to "running for election": next year

Article

BTC broke through 72000  USDT

IDF Shells Southern Lebanese Town

U.S. Vice President Vance: President Trump Will Continue to Pursue a Peaceful Resolution to the War

U.S. Vice President Vance: Iran Has Agreed to Open the Strait of Hormuz

Trump: US Can Easily Resume Military Action Against Iran if Negotiations Fail

US Vice President: Trump Has Lost Patience on Iran, Iran Agrees to Open Strait of Hormuz

Musk responds to "running for election": next year

Penafian：Konten diatas tidak merepresentasikan posisi HTX.，HTX tidak memberikan rekomendasi perdagangan apa pun.。

Semua Komentar0TerkiniHangat

Topik Trending