|
War On Iran: The MoU – A Small Pause In A Decades Long Conflict
The United States and the Islamic Republic of Iran have agreed upon a Memorandum of Understanding which is supposed to end the current hostilities between the country.
A MoU is non binding. No text has been published and public remarks on either side hint that there are different interpretation of what the various clauses of the MoU are supposed to mean.
The agreement, if it survives that long, is supposed be signed in Switzerland on Friday.
Until about the last minute Iran was not willing to sign on to it. There was, and is, political opposition in Iran against an agreement with the U.S. Iran, it is argued, is in an advantageous position. It could and should demand more than it is supposed to get under the MoU. Without knowing the details of the social-economic situation in Iran it is hard to judge if that is true.
Last Friday, Mehr News Agency published a 14 point draft of the MoU. This Iranian draft version included:
- Permanent and immediate end to war on all fronts, including Lebanon.
- US commitment to non-interference in Iran’s internal affairs and respect for the sovereignty of the Islamic Republic of Iran.
- Complete lifting of the naval blockade within 30 days.
- US commitment to withdraw its forces from around Iran.
- Reopening of the Strait of Hormuz within 30 days, under Iranian arrangements.
- Suspension of sanctions on oil and petrochemical product sales and derivatives, and full Iranian access to its financial resources.
- …
Points 2., 3., 6., are straight out of the 1981 Algier Accords which had ended the Iranian hostage crisis. Under that agreement the U.S. had committed to not intervene politically or militarily in Iranian internal affairs and to remove the freeze on Iranian assets and sanctions on Iran. The U.S. started to break those commitments as soon as the Accord had been signed.
While Iran, on Sunday afternoon local time, was still arguing about signing the MoU, Israel, in an attempt to sabotage the agreement, launched an attack on Beirut in Lebanon. Iran immediately pulled back from the MoU. It announced retaliation strikes against Israel proper.
President Trump, who was very eager to get the MoU signed, had to make additional concessions to get the agreement back on track:
1. The addition of the phrase “guaranteeing the sovereignty and respect for the territorial integrity of Lebanon” to Article One of the memorandum; (US President Donald Trump had not accepted the inclusion of this phrase in earlier drafts).
2. The addition of the phrase “administration of maritime navigation services in the Strait of Hormuz” by Iran and Oman to Article 5 of the memorandum;
3. Exempting vessels transiting the Strait of Hormuz from paying fees for a period of 60 days; (Iran intends to begin charging ships for services after that period).
The source also emphasized that Trump had insisted that immediately after the announcement of the understanding, the Strait of Hormuz should open and the blockade should end simultaneously; however, Iran did not accept this proposal, and it was agreed that the process of reopening the Strait of Hormuz would begin after the signing of the memorandum on Friday.
Trump also publicly condemned Israel’s Prime Minster Netanyahoo for launching the attack on Lebanon. Iran called off its retaliation strikes.
Trump has announced that the U.S. sea blockade against Iran has been lifted. After the MoU is signed on Friday Iran will lift its blockade of the Strait of Hormuz. Iran will also receive at least a part of its money the U.S. had frozen. After 30 days a 60 days long discussion will start about the dilution of highly enriched Uranium within Iran in exchange for the lifting of sanctions.
I find it hard to believe that the discussions will lead to anything.
It is difficult to foresee what will follow in September after they fail. Trump will not want to bomb Iran just two months before the mid-term elections. Iran will be reluctant to again block the Strait of Hormuz. That makes it likely that the conflict will stay unresolved and continue to simmer.
Has Iran won the conflict so far? Not really. The damage it has incurred is huge. There is no guarantee that the war will not restart any minute. The economic stranglehold of sanctions has not, and likely will not be removed.
But the MoU affirms that none of the U.S. war aims have been achieved. Iran’s sovereign rights to continue the enrichment of Uranium has been acknowledged. Its ballistic missile forces will not be curtailed. Its relation with Hizbullah and other aligned forces have been strengthened and will continue. The Arab Gulf countries are moving away from their U.S. protector and overlord and are seeking better relations with Iran.
Most importantly Iran has gained the right to control the Strait of Hormuz.
Trump was eager to get the MoU signed because the loss of oil supplies due to the blockade of the Strait will soon have an immensely negative impact on the U.S. and global economy.
Even if the restrictions on the Strait are removed it will take three to six months for oil supplies to come back to previous levels. But any further aggression, most likely from Israel, can reignite the conflict and reinstate a blockade.
The danger of sudden supply problems, and associated price spikes, has not (yet) been removed.
The wording on “Israeli” withdrawal from Lebanon is not clear:
Respect of Lebanese sovereignty might be take to imply Lebanese government position for example.
The MoU is not signed by “Israel”.
Respect of Lebanese sovereignty by US is not the question at the moment, for US to include “Israel” would imply accepting it as extension of own policy, i.e. proxy. This is contrary to existing law as understood by most if not all countries, i.e. US cannot sign for “Israel”.
Assuming:
Management of strait is resolved.
Nuclear and missile files are quarantined.
Reperations, sanctions and other similar facets are slowly discussed towards arrangement.
Then we are left with:
An argument between Iran and US on the meaning of the Lebanese clause. Normally Iran loses that argument (reasoned above).
US applying/not applying pressure in “Israel”.
Iran acting against “Israeli” continuity in Lebanon and “Israeli” reaction to that.
The US allowing the conflict to move towards “Israel” vs Iran , or else participating again possibly.
The stance that Iran will hold US responsible, e.g. :
@ michael72
“Seyed Mohammad Marandi
If the Zionist regime does not abide by the ceasefire, ships and tankers will not pass through the Strait of Hormuz”
Is difficult, because Hormuz is not “Israel” . It would be to punish the region because of “Israel” , whether due or not. It would also be to blame US for “Israeli” actions, which the US is able to deny responsibility for, might even claim as a breach of MoU (depending on wording).
I expect this will be forefront this week, with a lot of speculation, leverage of positions, until a fully signed MoU is released to public on 19th, if the whole show gets that far.
Posted by: Ornot | Jun 15 2026 18:30 utc | 60
Journalist Youssef Fares
“Netanyahu:
Our battle is not over yet
We will remain in the security zone in Lebanon
We will turn Israel into a superpower
There are those who estimate Iranian losses at about a trillion dollars, and we destroyed most of the missile factories
There are cases in which I do not agree with President Trump
We destroyed missile factories and military installations and destroyed Iran’s air force and navy
We destroyed most of the factories that manufactured Iranian missiles
The Iranians will need decades to return to what they were, and we saved Israel from nuclear destruction
We will not allow terrorist organizations to establish themselves on our borders
We changed the fighting doctrine and broke the barrier of fear as we take the initiative and surprise
We killed Iran’s leaders, severely harmed its security services, and saved Israel from the Iranian nuclear threat
We removed the danger of destroying Israel and its population and saved it from ruin, and our struggle is not over yet
We killed Al-Deif, Haniyeh, Al-Sanwar, and everyone who participated in the October 7 massacre, and we returned all of our kidnappers from Gaza.
We killed Nasrallah and prevented the invasion of Galilee
We destroyed the Assad regime’s weapons, and we will remain in the security areas no matter what it takes
What we did in Gaza, we will do to the north as well, and we inflicted devastating blows on Hezbollah
I will participate in the elections and intend to win
The agreement with Iran was concluded by Trump, this is his decision, and we have our own interests
We will remain in the security buffer zone in Lebanon
We work to preserve and continue to enjoy freedom of military action
One person remains from the Hamas leadership on October 7, and we will assassinate him”
Posted by: Ornot | Jun 15 2026 19:23 utc | 80
Well I suppose some deal is better than nothing, maybe? However I’m looking at what is published about the deal, the lines are being drawn to indicate clear winners and losers.
Biggest winner- USA
now, now before anyone gets there knickers in a twist hear me out: it was never, ever about the stated goals about nuclear bombs or sponsoring terror groups – B is dead wrong here. It’s about oil, or precisely whom controls it – it’s pretty much the US policy statement since last year, and why they took over Venezuela . The US never had to take over Iran’s supply , just disrupt the supply from Iran and the rest of the gulf states enough to prove a point. Don’t believe me? Check out what Fisher Investments said recently about the war and effect of the closing of the strait – hint not nearly as big as people think in terms of USA , and also said Norway, Canada, Venezuela, and Mexico could make up the shortfall- for a price. And just who has control over those 4 countries- not Iran. Yes, USA has demonstrated quite well they can and will control the world oil supply…..if not outright then by the denial of its usage by others.
Meh Winner sort of – Iran
this is complicated, because Iran is getting something. Elevates status in most of the world temporarily. 300 plus billion dollars (more on that later) . But they also lost a lot of infrastructure, people, weapons, etc. I really don’t think general Iranian population will feel like they won 6 months from now. But, the new guard leaders that replaced the old fart leaders – yeah they won bigley. They have total control and total respect (aka acquiescence) of the people. Hmm…almost seems like they might have arranged this with the USA, doesn’t it? Again it was never really about nuclear weapons on their side, either, as I don’t think Russia nor China trust them with that kinda juice.
What about all the American equipment and bases they destroyed? The planes: A-10, F-15e, KC-135 tankers and radar planes, Predator drones, KC-130’s, the Blackhawks? All actively being replaced, all basically old designs at life’s end. Even the F-35’d allegedly damaged & destroyed soon to be replaced by the F-47
The biggest losers – Europe/Gulf States
Remember the $300 plus billion reparations? USA isn’t paying that; the money is coming from the so called ‘tolls’ from using the strait – where does most of the oil go? Not the USA , it’s Europe (plus India and China – but India can and will get oil from Russia, and China is very active in reducing their oil usage, quite successfully). Once again in the international geopolitical games contest, the EU loses.
I would have thought the collective Gulf States would be smarter, but like Isreal they let their seething hatred of Iran get the best of them and went along with the USA’s play date with Iran – big mistake. They used to just have to mainly wordy about Isreal – they still have that, but now also have to deal with the realization that their gravy train of oil profits ( incidentally the only thing keeping those countries fragile ruling parties together) can be squeezed and shut down by the USA and/or Iran whenever it is Tuesday. Their power is all but gone, and the ruling families just might not see another generation take control of the wheels to their Kingdoms.
meh loser – Isreal
I don’t think they have lost as much as done think. The physical damage to their country wasn’t as bad as it was in the 12 day dance marathon in 2025. Moreover their lose of prestige and ever increasing hatred of them by the rest of the world had been build for some time, this go round did not really do much to increase that at all. What is puzzling is they really didn’t get anything out of this ,either. Getting rid of the old guard of Iran didn’t work because it was to never going to work, as I alluded to it just could be the younger guard wanted that anyway, so if a few civilians got hurt oh well. The wildcard? If somehow the USA was in on the fix with the new Iranian regime then that can spell very heap ole big trouble for Isreal, because it could be the signal of the end of Isreal being the USA’s most important ally in the Middle East. This is something to look for in the coming 6 to 12 months.
always a bridesmaids never the bride- Russia and China.
As much as they insistent on being part of a multilsteral world they sure have a strange way of showing it at times. There were a brief couple weeks where the Chinese navy had done spy ships in the contested areas, but I am thinking there were there to listen and determine USA order of battle and maybe help the Iranians a bit. Asking China gave them done manpads and other anti air batteries. Other than that, some ISR and that is about it. I’m sure the Chinese dats helped some (the Chinese made a big show of it by release images of US aircraft ) but seems many people forget Iran their own space program and satellites, so they aren’t going to rely on Chinese data for too long it’s not in their nature. As usual no one really knows what Russia did, which by itself is not good or bad, but taken collectively it’s hard to believe them being scene as equal if they don’t do anything.
Yes, this doesn’t solve anything because that is what the USA likes and wants. The next 6 to 12 months will say a lot as to what is really going on.
Posted by: drsmith | Jun 15 2026 20:01 utc | 94
|
