Has Iran emerged stronger than before?
Has Iran
emerged stronger than before?
Both sides
are claiming victory after the US-Iran deal was signed. Such claims, after more
than 100 days of conflict, are proof of how badly both sides needed to get out
of the conflict.
While the
deal has stopped the fighting, it is also the starting point for the most
difficult negotiations, negotiations that have already gone sour at the first
stage.
Both sides
are presenting the deal to their respective publics as a victory, but as our
analysts say, neither has been able to fully convince their people, and critics
on both sides say that their governments have made too many concessions to the
opposing government.
For Iran,
the deal with the US provides something else important besides a ceasefire:
Tehran now has the opportunity to claim that not only did it not lay down its
arms in this war, but that it has emerged from this conflict stronger than
before.
From the
beginning, Tehran’s primary goal was not to defeat the United States and Israel
in the traditional military sense. It was to emerge from the conflict with not
only the Islamic Republic of Iran intact, but also its leadership in power and
its negotiating position intact.
The MoU
allows Iran to claim that it has achieved these goals.
The
obligations imposed on Iran as a result of the MoU, while significant, are
relatively limited. Tehran has pledged to help make the Strait of Hormuz a safe
trade route, no different from the situation before the war.
In addition,
Iran has reaffirmed that it will not seek to acquire nuclear weapons and has
agreed to engage in negotiations on the future of its highly enriched uranium
and enrichment program. It should be noted that even before the war began, Iran
had repeatedly said that it would not build nuclear weapons.
On the other
hand, the obligations imposed on the United States under the agreement appear
to be far broader.
According to
the agreement, the United States will end the naval blockade of Iran (which was
lifted last night), will ease sanctions on Iranian oil exports, will give
Tehran access to its frozen Iranian assets, and will work with regional
partners on a reconstruction and economic development plan for Iran worth at
least $300 billion.
Perhaps this
is why critics of the government in Iran have been largely silent since the
text of the memorandum of understanding was revealed. The agreement gives the
Iranian leadership a chance to present itself as a success, they can claim that
Iran’s sovereignty has been recognized, the US naval blockade is ending,
sanctions relief is under consideration, and the agreement clearly mentions
funding for reconstruction.
But this
silence is unlikely to last long.
Iran’s
Supreme Leader Mojtaba Khamenei’s initial reaction to the memorandum of
understanding seems to be quite cautious. They have authorized the deal, but at
the same time made it clear to Iran’s political leadership that it has been
accepted at the behest of Iran’s Supreme National Security Council.
However,
remember that the most difficult issues in this memorandum of understanding
have not been resolved, but rather postponed.
Now, the
negotiations will be held under intense pressure on issues such as the future
of Iran’s enriched uranium, the size of its uranium enrichment industry, and
the restoration of damaged nuclear facilities. This could be a problem for
Tehran’s leadership.
For weeks,
Iran’s state media, the Revolutionary Guards, parliament, and hardliners have
been telling their supporters that Iran has defeated the United States and
Israel. So public expectations are high. Critics could portray any agreement on
enriched uranium or the nuclear infrastructure as if the Iranian regime had
made concessions to the enemy even after victory.
But no
agreement could have been just as dangerous.
Trump claims
'big win', critics announce huge concessions
According to
him, it fulfills the main purpose of the US in starting this war, which is to
prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons.,Image source: Reuters
,Image
captionAccording to Donald Trump, it fulfills the main purpose of the US in
starting this war, which is to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons.
Donald Trump
calls the agreement a 'big win' for the US. According to him, it fulfills the
main purpose of the US in starting this war, which is to prevent Iran from
acquiring nuclear weapons.
He has
achieved a success in the form of the recovery of the global economy due to the
immediate opening of the Strait of Hormuz.
When the
conflict escalated and the Strait of Hormuz was closed, surveys in the US
revealed that the American people were getting fed up with the rising prices of
gasoline and the effects of the war on the country.
One of the
reasons for Trump's victory in the 2024 presidential election was the economic
dissatisfaction of the American people at that time. The perception that the
war the president has started is taking a toll on the economic well-being of
ordinary citizens has become politically damaging for Trump.
Although he
himself will not be a candidate in the November midterm elections, this anxiety
could create further problems for his Republican colleagues. Several of these
candidates are already facing growing resentment from potential voters who fear
that the United States has become embroiled in a conflict that could drag on
for a long time.
Against this
backdrop, the deal gives Trump a breathing space and his political allies hope
that he can portray himself as a leader who brought the conflict to a
relatively early end.
But critics
of the deal, including some members of the Republican Party, have already
accused Trump of overcompensating.
At the heart
of the debate is the promise to provide Iran with a $300 billion reconstruction
fund.
Trump wrote
in a statement on Truth Social that “the US is not paying Iran $300 billion.
This is fake news.” He added that “the US has only had success, falling oil
prices and victory.”
Although
Trump and other officials in his administration have made it clear that the US
will not pay this $300 billion, there is still unease among some within the
party.
Texas Senator
Ted Cruz, generally considered a reliable ally of Trump, told the American
magazine ‘The Hill’ that “history teaches us that giving billions of dollars to
religious extremists who want to kill us is not a good idea.”
“I think the
president is being given very bad advice.”
Conservative
commentator Tucker Carlson put it more bluntly.
“This is a
very humiliating defeat for the United States,” he said on X.
The Trump
administration has also had to admit that some of its goals are no longer
priorities and were not even mentioned in the agreement.
For example,
at the beginning of the conflict, Trump promised that the US military would
“destroy their missiles and destroy their missile industry.”
In March,
Trump promised that the US was working to ensure that “the Iranian regime
cannot continue to arm, fund and direct forces beyond its borders.”
But the
agreement makes no mention of Iran’s ties to regional proxy groups.
Now, it
appears that the Trump administration has backed away from that goal. Vice
President J.D. Vance told reporters that the US “expects” Hezbollah to refrain
from firing on Israelis.
He added
that the ceasefire is “somewhat erratic” and that fighting can be expected to
“suddenly flare up” at any time.
This could
make the agreement unpopular with Republicans who see the US commitment to
Israel’s security as an unwavering aspect of American policy.
Points
12-14: Monitoring and Final Negotiations
The final
few points of the document detail how the agreement will proceed in practice.
They state
that the US and Iran will establish a “mechanism” to monitor the implementation
of the MOU and compliance with the future agreement, but what that will look
like in practice is unclear.
After that,
once the MOU is signed and implemented, the US and Iran will begin negotiations
for a final agreement.
Finally, the
MOU makes it clear that the final agreement will be ratified by a binding
resolution of the UN Security Council.





Post a Comment