11-5 the score of the US-Iran deal, but the second half now begins

“And when reality doesn’t suit you, so much the worse for reality”, one could say, seeing the American president Donald Trump trying to present the framework agreement signed this week by the leaders of the United States and Iran as a “great success.”

Donald Trump was quick on Thursday to denounce as “jealous, malicious or stupid” those who dare to argue that he “has not been tough enough on Iran”. This was the way he chose to hit back at those who criticize as negative for the US – or “unworthy” and “incommensurate” the war that preceded it – the memorandum of understanding that it signed with Iran.

However, Trump’s critics of this deal now include many of his own, Republicans and MAGAs, Americans and Israelis. In other words, the “fires” that “pain” and that “bother” the most in the current phase are the “from the inside“, which are actually coming just a few months before the crucial November midterm elections for the US Congress.

Of the total of 14 points of the agreement that were made public, eleven could be considered “problematic” for the US. In particular, the following raise concerns:

Point 4. “…the US is committed to withdrawing its forces from the greater Iranian region within 30 days of the signing of the final agreement.”

Point 5. “…Iran will make every effort to ensure the free and safe passage of merchant ships, without any charge, for a period of 60 days, from the Persian Gulf to the Sea of ​​Oman and vice versa.”

Point 6. “…Iran will initiate a dialogue with the Sultanate of Oman to determine the future control framework and maritime services in the Strait of Hormuz, in consultation with the other countries bordering the Persian Gulf.”

Point 7. “…the US is committed, together with its regional partners, to formulating a plan of at least $300 billion for the reconstruction and economic development of Iran.”

Point 8. “…the US is committed to lifting any sanctions imposed on Iran based on a timetable included in the final agreement.”

Point 9. “…the two sides agreed to resolve the issue of enriched material accumulated in Iran’s stockpiles through a mechanism to be jointly decided (…) The minimum method required will be on-site dilution of the material under the supervision of the International Atomic Energy Agency.”

Point 10. “…until the final agreement is signed, the US and Iran agree to maintain the existing status quo. Iran will freeze its nuclear program in its current state, and the United States will not impose new sanctions or deploy additional military forces to the region.”

Item 11. “…the US commits that, immediately upon the signing of this Memorandum and until the final lifting of sanctions, the US Department of the Treasury will issue exemptions allowing the export of Iranian crude oil and petroleum products.”

Point 12. “….the US is committed to allowing the full utilization of frozen Iranian funds and assets (…) The procedures for releasing the funds will be agreed upon during the negotiations. These funds will be fully available for payment to any final beneficiary designated by the Central Bank of Iran, and the US is committed to issuing all necessary permits.”

Winners and losers

From the said agreement, as it was publicly presented, the Iran “ensures” a number of benefits:

1. the extension of the ceasefire for at least 60 days,
2. the removal of American forces from the areas near its borders,
3. the commitment to non-interference of “outsiders” in internal Iranian affairs,
4. the survival of the theocratic regime of the Islamic Revolutionary Guards,
5. maintaining its missile/ballistic program;
6. the gradual lifting of the sanctions imposed on him,
7. ending attacks against Hezbollah in Lebanon;
8. the creation of a fund for the post-war reconstruction/reconstruction of the Islamic Republic of Iran;
9. the unfreezing of his assets,
10. the recognition of Iranian control over the Straits of Hormuz (see points 5 and 6)
11. and – possibly – keeping the enriched uranium within the Iranian borders which will have to be diluted further.

The Trump’s USA on the other hand, from the agreement in question they appear to “get” basically five benefits:

1. the extension of the ceasefire for at least 60 days,
2. the opening of the Straits of Hormuz,
3. the Iranian commitment not to acquire nuclear weapons;
4. the -temporary- freeze on the Iranian nuclear program
5. and the commitment to further dilute Iran’s existing enriched uranium.

All the above-mentioned “benefits”, whether one approaches them from the side of the USA or from the side of Iran, of course, will be judged in practice, by the extent to which the above-mentioned agreement framework is going to be implemented, as well as by the course of the negotiations that are now restarting under new circumstances and from a new starting point.

Starting point for new negotiations

There is always the chance that the whole process will blow up and the American bombings will start again, as Washington has already warned (see Trump and Hegseth’s statements). Doing so, however, would push energy prices back up, and as we approach November’s US midterm elections the political stakes will be even higher for Trump and the Republicans.

From the perspective of the US and US interests, the 14 points of the agreement presented this week do not appear to justify or “justify” the war that began on February 28.

Trump himself, however, does not seem to care and is now presenting as “successes” the decline in oil prices, which had risen due to the war, and the opening of the Strait of Hormuz, which had been closed due to the war.

The American presidenthe doesn’t understand the war he started“, comments Tom Nichols characteristically in the Atlantic. “Iran’s regime has not even pledged not to start charging tolls after two months“, comments the Wall Street Journal in a critical mood.