Why Trump’s Iran deal might not last

close Cancel email WhatsApp link share Share bookmark Save

Could the memorandum of understanding between the US and Iran actually be a memorandum of misunderstanding? That’s the question veterans of Middle East negotiations are asking in the wake of this apparent breakthrough.

The text of the memorandum is not public. The “negotiations” between the US and Iran have occurred largely via intermediaries – Pakistan and Qatar. So far as we can glean from public statements, Tehran has agreed to reopen the Strait of Hormuz from Friday, through which 20 per cent of the world’s oil supplies flow, and the US has agreed to end its naval blockade of Iranian ports in the strait.

All the tricky issues – the fate of Iran’s nuclear programme, sanctions relief for Iran in exchange for compliance with the agreement – have been kicked down the road and will be negotiated within a 60-day ceasefire period after the accord’s “signing ceremony”, which will apparently take place in Switzerland on Friday. So the two-month old shaky ceasefire is extended by a further two months, and the big problems still loom large.

Vessels anchored in the Strait of Hormuz as seen from Musandam, Oman (Photo: Reuters)

Thus far, this is the status quo ante. The Strait of Hormuz was open before Donald Trump launched this war against Iran, in conjunction with Israel, more than 100 days ago, and there was no US blockade. Nor was there a global energy crisis, or rising inflation due to higher fuel costs. What, then, was the war for? The US killed Iran’s Supreme Leader, and destroyed Iran’s navy. But the theocracy of Iran has been replaced by an even more militarised leadership.

The fact that Iran held off confirming its assent to the deal until the early hours of Monday Tehran time, after Trump’s 80th birthday celebrations on Sunday, shows how little trust there is between the two sides. The Iranians didn’t want to give the President a win on his birthday.

For his part, Trump posted on his Truth Social platform: “The Deal with the Islamic Republic of Iran is now complete. Congratulations to all! I hereby fully authorize the toll free opening of the Strait of Hormuz, and, simultaneously herewith, authorize the immediate removal of the United States Naval blockade. Ships of the World, start your engines. Let the oil flow!”

Let the oil flow indeed. the US President’s base of supporters was not happy about another war in the Middle East, something Candidate Trump vowed to avoid at all costs. And nor is Maga happy about higher gas prices. Letting the oil flow is meant to reassure Americans that prices at the pump will soon be coming down, just as soon as oil tankers can traverse the Strait of Hormuz.

Fuel prices at a petrol station in the US state of Georgia, with a sticker blaming Donald Trump (Picture: Ravi Nessman/AP)

Note that Trump emphasised the “toll-free” opening of the strait – the Iranians threatened to open a toll booth in the 21-mile section of the strait which they control, not something they’d done before the war started, and a source of revenue for a cash-strapped regime. So the President has to say that ain’t happening, lest he be seen as weak.

Does this memorandum of understanding between the US and Iran extend to a ceasefire in Lebanon? Israel has been attacking southern Lebanon, targeting Hezbollah strongholds. Hezbollah is an ally of Iran, one of its proxy forces in the region.

In a statement, Iran’s Supreme National Security Council said the agreement called for an immediate end to military operations on all fronts, including Lebanon. Israel, which was not a party to the US-Iran negotiations, has not yet commented on the deal.

The agreement looked shaky on Sunday after Israel bombed the southern suburbs of Beirut in retaliation for rocket fire from Hezbollah. An angry Trump told The New York Times that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu had shown “no judgement” in ordering those strikes, and called on all sides to “stand down.”

Given Trump’s popularity in Israel because of his staunch support for the US ally, close observers of the Middle East believe Netanyahu must go along with whatever the US has agreed to with Iran. Israelis go to the polls in the autumn and Netanyahu cannot afford to alienate Trump.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu cannot afford to upset the US President (Picture: Joe Raedle/Getty)

Can Trump improve on the 2015 Obama Iran nuclear deal, which he withdrew from in 2016, declaring it “the worst deal ever?” That was essentially an agreement in which Iran froze its nuclear enrichment work in return for relief from the sanctions crippling its economy.

Trump, having excoriated the Obama administration for giving the Iranians “pallets of cash”, can hardly do the same. There are reports that Qatar holds seized Iranian financial assets, and could unfreeze those if directed. Qatar was an intermediary in the talks.

Once again, the detail of what has – or hasn’t – been agreed is shrouded in mystery. What we do know is that Iran’s regime is desperate for cash to ensure its own survival.

Trump claims that his agreement will assure that Iran “cannot develop or purchase a nuclear weapon.” Iran agreed to that when it first ratified the Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty in 1970, and reaffirmed that agreement on the first page of the Obama-era accord.

I am pleased to hear the memorandum of understanding with Iran to allow the Strait of Hormuz to open has been agreed to. I will be watching closely the ensuing negotiations regarding Iran’s nuclear program and other matters.

I am somewhat concerned that Iran’s view of the… https://t.co/3vSNSOc1mp — Lindsey Graham (@LindseyGrahamSC) June 14, 2026

Yet the Iranians insist they will never give up their right to enrich uranium under that treaty, because they want a civilian nuclear programme.

Trump told The New York Times there were still negotiations over whether Iran would suspend its uranium enrichment for 20 years – he hinted he might settle for a 15-year suspension – but said Iran would be forever limited to enriching at low levels that “could never be used by the military.”

Senator Lindsay Graham, a hawk on Iran and a member of Trump’s Republican party, said on X: “I am somewhat concerned that Iran’s view of the agreement seems different than what the American negotiating team is claiming.”

Both the US and Iran wanted an agreement, for their different domestic political reasons. The next few days will test the strength of the memorandum of understanding. Or is it, as the sceptics claim, a memorandum of misunderstanding?