I don’t believe anything from Iranian sources. We’ll see the details when they come out (though the US side should not allow Iranian propaganda drive the narrative).
President Trump has said many words and done many things on the issue of Iran. He’s gone further than any US leader to address the threats from the regime. He’s also aware of the damage caused to our interests and reputation by Biden’s withdrawal from Afghanistan. The way he resolves (or doesn’t) this conflict will have lasting consequences for our interests, reputation, and Trump’s own legacy.
Ultimately, the results will speak for themselves.
But, regardless of what’s been said and done and what the US settles for in the end, Israel is a sovereign country and not bound by any deal it doesn’t sign. Lebanon is a sovereign country and not bound by anything Iran says or does on behalf of a terrorist group inside its borders. They will act in their self-interest, just as we would (and do).
As for the Iranian people, President Trump said some specific, very clear things to them. Those words impact their lives. A man’s word is sacred. The President will be judged against those words. Either way, the people have their own interests and don’t have to abide by any deal that undermines them. They will have the last word. But their trust in America, just like everyone else’s affected by this conflict (and those observing and taking notes), will have an impact on our credibility. Losing that trust means fighting the next fight alone. Having friends is much better.
Those are the stakes. Now, it’s up to President Trump.
In comedy nothing is more basic than the bait-and-switch: the audience builds expectation, the climax arrives, and at the last moment Lucy yanks the football and Charlie Brown crashes to the ground. It’s a comedy mainstay—and lately, it seems to have crept into geopolitics as well.
This week saw multiple cases of the trope. On Sunday, we were supposedly so close to a deal that Trump demanded Israel take a direct Iranian attack on the cheek. Then, at the last moment, a U.S. helicopter was downed by Iranian fire, and the president declared they’d been “playing us for suckers.” Deal’s off.
What followed was a night of strikes, plans for another, even a declaration that “in the not too distant future, we will be taking Kharg Island.” Then, at the last moment—crash. “Discussions and final points have been, in both concept and great detail, approved by all parties involved,” according to the White House, and Trump called off the strikes.
Charlie Brown isn’t the only one with a headache, and no one—except the Iranians—is laughing.
But much like the devil, the fate of this deal is in the details—and so far, the details look familiar. This MOU appears nearly identical to the disastrous deal floated in late May, the one Trump abandoned after Republicans had an allergic reaction to it, while Iran reportedly concluded he was simply too desperate for a deal and they could wait him out.
Rather than a full agreement, what’s on the table is an MOU extending the ceasefire for 60 days while nuclear negotiations continue—and, despite the steep costs Israel recently paid to sever the two fronts, this one appears to fold Lebanon back in as well. On the nuclear file, the text lays out a framework for addressing Iran’s enriched uranium stockpile, though any actual action would wait on a second, more detailed accord.
Worse is the financial relief: according to the report, after reopening the strait, Iran would be given temporary sanctions waivers allowing it to sell oil for 60 days, generating precious revenue for Tehran. That relief would expand if Iran complies with the initial agreement and shows “good faith” in subsequent negotiations—though, as one diplomat put it, “there is no set date for sanctions relief, and it will be tied to the implementation of the deal.”
Less clear is what happens to the billions in Iranian funds frozen overseas. Iran has insisted it must receive some money immediately upon signing any initial deal, while the U.S. has said release would come in tranches based on compliance. Separately, the U.S., Iran and Qatar have reportedly discussed a mechanism letting Iran access some of its frozen funds in Qatar for humanitarian purchases. I’m not sure if Qatar is simply trying to make its terrorism support tax-deductible, but these payments are humanitarian in name only—just ask Hamas. Money is fungible, and the regime still controls imports, so it can either redirect funds from what little it gives its own population now that it is being covered by Qatar, or simply sell the humanitarian goods to its own population and pocket the revenue.
This deal can be judged by a simple test: does it merely pause the regime—leaving Iran roughly where it’s been since the blockade began—or does it rewind the clock, leaving Tehran better off than before? If sanctions are eased and frozen assets unlocked, it’s definitely the latter.
As one very senior Israeli official put it to me this morning, the deal is “shit.”
The bad news is that Trump paused operations when the deal hasn’t even been ratified yet. As of last night, the line was that “the U.S. and Iran have agreed on the text of a deal,” with the caveat that it still needs final sign-off. Trump said he expected a signing ceremony over the weekend. Iran’s foreign ministry, for its part, said only that Tehran had “not yet reached a final decision.”
The good news is that nothing’s locked in—the gaps between the parties remain huge—and given how fond Trump has grown of yanking the football away at the last second, maybe this time it’s the Ayatollah who ends up flat on his back.