South Korea is consulting with the United States and Iran about navigation through the Strait of Hormuz, the Foreign Ministry said Tuesday. In this photo, the South Korean oil tanker Universal Winner arrives near Ulsan on June 10 after exiting the Strait. Photo by Yonhap
South Korea has begun consultations with the United States, Iran and other relevant countries regarding navigation through the Strait of Hormuz following the signing of a preliminary deal aimed at ending the monthslong war in the Middle East, the foreign ministry said Tuesday.
According to U.S. officials, President Donald Trump, Vice President JD Vance and Iran’s parliamentary speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf inked the memorandum of understanding (MOU) that would extend the countries’ ceasefire for 60 days, during which negotiations will take place to address nuclear and other issues to reach a final peace deal.
A large number of vessels, including two dozen South Korea-linked ships, have been stranded in the waterway, which Iran has effectively choked off with threats of missile and drone strikes amid the war.
“We are assessing the details related to maritime transit and have begun necessary communication with relevant countries, including the U.S. and Iran,” ministry spokesperson Park Il said during a regular press briefing.
According to Park, the government is closely monitoring a range of factors before making judgments on passage operations, including the presence of naval mines, the overall security situation in the strait and shipping traffic conditions.
He said the government will continue to prioritize the safety of South Korean vessels and sailors while working to ensure the smooth resumption of shipping.
Park added the government will also maintain close consultations with shipping companies in assessing developments in the region.
Copyright (c) Yonhap News Agency prohibits its content from being redistributed or reprinted without consent, and forbids the content from being learned and used by artificial intelligence systems.
Venezuela has signed an agreement with General Electric Vernova aimed at boosting electricity generation as the country seeks to improve a power system plagued by years of outages. Officials say the deal could add 5 gigawatts of capacity over four years.
Published On 16 Jun 202616 Jun 2026
Share
The TWZ Newsletter
Weekly insights and analysis on the latest developments in military technology, strategy, and foreign policy.
Here’s TWZ’s weekly carrier tracker monitoring America’s flattop fleet, including deployed Carrier Strike Groups (CSG) and Amphibious Ready Groups (ARG), using publicly available open-source information. Check out last week’s report here.
The U.S. naval blockade of Iranian ports remains in full effect, for now, pending the execution of the ceasefire agreement, scheduled to be formally signed on Friday in Geneva, according to a notice released today by NAVCENT. U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM) forces launched multiple waves of strikes last week against Iran following the shootdown of a U.S. Army Apache helicopter, and disabled an additional two commercial vessels that tried to skirt the blockade, bringing the total to nine. Two carriers, USS Abraham Lincoln and USS George H.W. Bush, embarked with a combined seven squadrons of F/A-18E/F Super Hornets, two squadrons of EA-18G Growlers, and one squadron of F-35C Lightning IIs, continue to support “self defense” strikes and blockade operations.
The Lincoln CSG has been deployed for nearly seven months and would likely be among the first naval assets to rotate out of the theater if the blockade winds down. The details, and scale, of the drawdown of forces in the CENTCOM area of responsibility (AOR), as agreed upon in the memorandum of understanding (MOU), are murky as of publication. More than 20 U.S. Navy surface combatants have been operating in the region.
U.S. Navy fighter jets and command and control aircraft prepare to take off from USS Abraham Lincoln (CVN 72) as the ship transits the Arabian Sea. pic.twitter.com/SAGl2e7y0e
— U.S. Central Command (@CENTCOM) June 13, 2026
USS Nimitz entered the final leg of her homeport shift to Norfolk, operating off the east coast in U.S. 2nd Fleet AOR after a monthslong circumnavigation of South America, according to flight tracking data and public AIS. Nimitz conducted operations northwest of Cuba and the Bahamas last week. On Thursday, six Super Hornets, attached to the “Kestrels” of Strike Fighter Squadron (VFA) 137, carried out an air power demonstration and show of force, dropping MK-82/BLU-111 bombs on a simulated target in the Gulf of America.
On the west coast, USS Theodore Roosevelt continues working up in preparation for a future deployment. The flattop got underway on June 10 for INSURV inspections to verify readiness and returned to San Diego the following day. The group was also spotted conducting a live fire exercise with the Mk 38 25mm machine gun. USS Carl Vinson got underway for sea trials after a nine-month Planned Incremental Availability (PIA) and moored at port in San Diego on June 13.
In the Western Pacific, USS George Washington is on a summer patrol and operating in the Philippine Sea. The CSG conducted a replenishment-at-sea with USNS Earl Warren and helo operations while underway in the vicinity of Guam last week. Destroyer USS Shoup, part of the CSG, pulled into Apra Harbor early this morning, according to AIS.
Eyes in the sky.
An MH-60S Sea Hawk assigned to Helicopter Sea Combat Squadron (HSC) 12 operates above Nimitz-class aircraft carrier USS George Washington (CVN 73) while underway in the Philippine Sea.
The George Washington Carrier Strike Group is operating in the @US7thFleet… pic.twitter.com/l4UWAVHUAW
— U.S. Navy (@USNavy) June 15, 2026
Two ARG-MEUs are currently deployed. Forward-deployed USS Tripoli continues operations in the CENTCOM AOR, and USS Boxer is underway in the Indo-Pacific (INDOPACOM) AOR, operating in the South China Sea. For a detailed review of America’s amphibious assault fleet, check out our recent report here.
Note: Positions are general approximations. Non-deployed LHA/LHD amphibious warships are not shown.
Contact the author: ian.ellis-jones@teamrecurrent.io
Benchmark S&P 500 rises 1.7 percent, while tech-heavy Nasdaq jumps 3.1 percent.
Published On 16 Jun 202616 Jun 2026
US stocks have rallied on hopes that the tentative deal to end the US-Israel war on Iran will restore stability to energy supply chains roiled by months of disruption in the Strait of Hormuz.
The S&P 500 rose 1.7 percent on Monday, taking the benchmark index within touching distance of its all-time high.
list of 4 itemsend of list
The tech-focused Nasdaq Composite jumped 3.1 percent, aided by a 19.6 percent gain by SpaceX, which on Friday made the biggest market debut in history and minted the world’s first trillionaire in Elon Musk.
The blue-chip Dow Jones Industrial Average climbed 0.9 percent, closing at a record high.
Brent crude futures, the primary benchmark for global oil prices, fell nearly 5 percent to just above $83 a barrel, the lowest price since the first week of the conflict.
Asian stock markets were largely flat on Monday morning, after surging the previous day on the back of US President Donald Trump’s announcement of his deal with Tehran.
As of 01:30 GMT, Japan’s benchmark Nikkei 225 was 0.01 percent lower, while South Korea’s Kospi, the best-performing major index this year, was down 0.06 percent.
In Taiwan, the TAIEX was up 0.2 percent.
Hong Kong’s Hang Seng Index was down 0.07 percent.
Jay Goldberg, a senior analyst for tech-related equities at the Chicago-based Seaport Research Partners, said the announcement of the US-Iran deal had tilted investors’ risk balancing act towards buying into the market.
“To oversimplify, the debate has been: AI spending is strong, but there’s a war going on,” Goldberg told Al Jazeera.
“The war is over, it seems, so that side of the argument falls away. Investors are now feeling better about taking on more risk,” Goldberg said.
While Washington and Tehran’s framework has raised hopes for a return to stability in global energy markets, it is expected to take months before energy flows fully return to normal, due to the massive backlog of vessels around the Strait of Hormuz and the need to ensure the waterway is safe from Iranian naval mines.
According to the International Shipping Chamber, about 500 ships are still waiting to pass through the strait, which normally carries about one-fifth of global supplies of oil and liquefied natural gas.
WASHINGTON — The terms of a deal to end President Trump’s war with Iran remained a secret on Monday as both sides claimed victory and the months-long conflict reached a nebulous end.
The memorandum of understanding, providing a rough framework to conclude the war, was signed digitally Sunday, with a ceremony scheduled to take place on Friday in Switzerland, U.S. officials said.
Trump hailed the document as a breakthrough after months of negotiations. Yet its broad contours remained unclear more than a day after the deal was announced, as each side offered conflicting public messaging about what had been agreed.
Iran said it would continue regulating traffic through the Strait of Hormuz, a strategic paradigm shift from the prewar status quo that was denied by the White House. The two sides expressed disagreement over whether the status of Iran’s ballistic missile program would be addressed in future negotiations, or whether Israel’s withdrawal from Lebanon was a part of the deal.
And Trump administration officials rejected Iranian claims that the United States would provide immediate sanctions relief as misleading “spin.”
Hours later, another U.S. official suggested that Iran, in fact, might receive some relief at the front end.
“We are prepared to release frozen funds, and we are prepared to release sanctions,” a senior U.S. official told reporters on a call. “And we’ll do some small gestures of that in the beginning, if they make some small gestures to us that show they’re willing to meet their commitments as well.
“We’ll know over the next two to three weeks whether those understandings will turn into actual agreement,” the official added.
Trump started the war in February citing Iran’s nuclear program, which had expanded after he withdrew from a prior nuclear agreement negotiated by President Obama. That deal capped more than two years of intensive diplomacy but ultimately failed under the weight of political criticism from Republicans — led by Trump — over its inclusion of sanctions relief for Tehran.
Trump administration officials said the new agreement would include a commitment from Iran not to develop or purchase nuclear weapons — a vow the Islamic Republic has repeatedly made through the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, the Obama-era deal and a religious edict from the late supreme leader. Yet the enforcement mechanisms for policing Iran’s nuclear work were left to negotiate another day.
In an interview with CBS News, Vice President JD Vance acknowledged that Iran could get significant sanctions relief — and up to $300 billion in reconstruction funds — if they abide by U.S. terms, such as the full reopening of the Strait of Hormuz, one of the world’s most important commercial waterways.
“Our expectation is that the strait is going to be opened in a toll-free way for the long term, and that’s the sort of thing that we’re going to figure out in these technical negotiations,” Vance said.
In a separate interview, he described the president’s policy as “extending an open hand” to Tehran.
“The hard-liners of the Iranian system will overemphasize the benefits that Iran gets,” he added, “while underemphasizing all the things that they have to concede, and all the things that they have to provide, in order to get these benefits.”
The news of peace came with a sense of bewilderment and uncertainty in a region that suffered as collateral damage through months of war.
Sunni Arab states that once hoped Iran would emerge weakened from the war issued tepid support for an agreement that could ultimately leave the fate of their oil exports at the whims of an emboldened adversary. And Israeli leaders, across the political aisle, expressed deep concerns over the deal in private, warning they would not be bound by an agreement to which they were not a party.
Israel’s decisions moving forward — particularly in Lebanon— may ultimately decide whether the agreement survives over the next 60 days, when Washington and Tehran plan on ironing out its more technical details.
Hours after word of the signing came out, a stream of cars crowded the highway leading to southern Lebanon, full of displaced families desperate to check on homes and villages they hadn’t seen for more than 100 days.
They did so in defiance of Lebanese officials, who called on people to remain where they were until an official end to war in Lebanon — a secondary front in the larger U.S.-Israel war on Iran that has nevertheless seen staggering levels of destruction.
A woman and her children return to their Lebanese village Monday following the ceasefire announcement.
(Mohammed Zaatari / Ap Photo/mohammed Zaatari)
In the more than three months since the Lebanese Shiite group Hezbollah attacked Israel, nearly 3,800 people have been killed, and almost a quarter of the country’s 6 million people are displaced. Israeli troops occupy more than 10% of Lebanese territory, leaving a trail of destruction that has seen swaths of the country’s south all but razed.
None of that discouraged Hassan Shareef from leaving where he was staying in Beirut at 7 a.m. to head to Nabatieh, one of south Lebanon’s largest cities and a frequent target of Israeli strikes in recent weeks, to check on his tailoring business.
“I wasn’t afraid. I had to come. But what I saw would make you cry,” he said. “Everything is gone. My house, I can’t live in it. And the business is destroyed.”
Aqeel Khalaf, an herbalist, hit the road in the early morning with his brother, son and daughter-in-law. They reached Nabatieh in two hours.
Yet it was less of a homecoming than Khalaf hoped: Israeli troops were still stationed near his village, a few miles down the road from where he stood in Nabatieh’s central market. Their house was tantalizingly close, but for the moment it might as well have been on the moon.
“It’s hard for me, but the Lebanese army told us we can’t go yet. We have no choice,” Khalaf said. “Maybe in 24 hours, when things crystallize with the deal.”
He could at least check on his shop here in the central market, though he already knew there would be damage: The family regularly checked satellite images of the area and saw the building was hit about a week ago.
Standing before it, Khalaf saw how the wall of the adjacent building had toppled onto the ground floor, flooding the shop with rubble and coating everything with a film of fine gray dust. A nearby blast had collapsed the roof.
“Nabatieh was hit very hard this time,” he said. Still, he could salvage something, he said, pointing to his son as he fished out boxes of herbal treatments from under the rubble.
Two ceasefires in the last two months, forged during U.S.-led talks between the Lebanese and Israeli governments but without Hezbollah or Iran’s involved, were broken as soon as they were announced. A previous ceasefire from November 2024 saw Hezbollah stop all attacks while Israel continued military operations in south Lebanon.
This iteration of the truce appeared to have more success: On Monday, Hezbollah launched no missiles but announced an attack on an Israeli force to stop its advance; and the Israeli military mostly stayed its fire as well, barring a number of shelling incidents and a drone strike on a car in the village of Kfar Tebnit that injured a journalist and killed one person, according to Lebanese media.
Lebanese army units, meanwhile, deployed in parts of the south, barring motorists from reaching areas near Israeli troops. Lebanon’s army remained on the sidelines during the war, but 30 soldiers, including a general, having been killed in Israeli attacks since March 2. Hezbollah attacks killed at least 30 Israeli soldiers and one civilian contractor.
Obstacles to a more durable peace remain. Israeli officials insist on freedom of action against Hezbollah, and they will create a so-called security zone in Lebanon indefinitely so to protect Israel’s northern border. For its part, Hezbollah says it will respond to any attack and will continue fighting until Israel withdraws.
Though the truce appeared to be holding for now, Khalaf, who had raced to reopen his Nabatieh shop after the 2024 ceasefire, was waiting this time. For now, he would take what stock he could and open a shop in Sidon or Beirut.
“We have to work and feed our families. But the damage is too much this time. I’ll come back when things are better,” he said. “And my home too. When I get to see it, even if it’s a mound of rubble, I’ll pitch a tent on it and rebuild.”
Wilner reported from Washington and Bulos from Nabatieh.
The preliminary deal to end US-Israel war on Iran has sent oil prices tumbling to a three-month low amid hopes that the Strait of Hormuz will reopen.
But it could be months before American consumers see major relief at the petrol pump.
list of 3 itemsend of list
The closure of the strategic chokepoint disrupted global energy markets for more than three months, cutting off a major shipping route through which roughly one-fifth of the world’s oil and liquefied natural gas normally passes.
On Sunday, US President Donald Trump said prices would “drop like a rock” once the strait reopens, a claim he has made multiple times in the past few weeks.
However, experts caution that a major decline in prices is unlikely to happen as quickly as Trump suggests.
While Asian markets rely more heavily on oil shipped through the Strait of Hormuz than North American markets, tighter supply and steady demand have pushed prices higher worldwide.
On Monday, petrol prices in the US remained above $4 per gallon (3.78 litres), averaging $4.06 nationwide, according to the American Automobile Association (AAA). This was a dip from a high in early May of $4.48 per gallon.
By comparison, prices stood at $2.98 per gallon on February 28, when the US and Israel first struck Iran, triggering a ripple effect across global energy markets.
Energy prices have risen sharply in the US in recent months, increasing 7.7 percent over the last two months alone, and are up 40 percent from a year ago, according to last week’s inflation report from the Labor Department’s Bureau of Labor Statistics,
However, prices are beginning to fall, a dip that began as Washington and Tehran entered negotiations.
“The potential deal that the US and Iran agreed to over the weekend certainly could pave the way for even lower prices… in the next two to three days by what we saw over the weekend,” Patrick De Haan, head of petroleum analysis at GasBuddy, which tracks petrol prices, told Al Jazeera.
But De Haan expects a plateau and says that consumers may not see gas prices at pre-war levels until 2027, even if the ceasefire holds.
“It may take many months, if not beyond a year, for global oil inventories to recover to pre-war levels,” De Haan said.
Amid strains on the supply chain, producers will also need time to ramp up output, while port bottlenecks and heightened demand during the busy summer travel season could delay any substantial relief for everyday consumers.
“There are some mitigating factors that are going to slow the decline in prices. There are a lot of organisations and companies that have to re-up their stockpiles [like the US’s strategic petroleum reserve] and fulfil contracts that have been on hold for the last few months,” John Deal, managing director of capital markets at the Post Oak Group investment bank, said.
Fixing kinks in the supply chain takes time.
Oil production slumped amid the war. More than 14 million barrels per day, or 14 percent of the world’s demand, has been shut, according to the International Energy Agency.
Deal said it would take time to get oil production back online.
“My sense is that there’s going to be sustained high demand through the summertime, and we probably won’t get back to pre-war levels [on petrol prices] until after the summer, maybe September or October,” Deal said.
Mark Jones, a professor of political science at Rice University, said that producers might be reluctant to bring full operations back online until they can see the ceasefire hold.
The agreement opening the blockade is for a 60-day negotiation period between the two countries.
“Many [producers] may be reluctant to restart production until they are convinced that the peace will hold, because the last thing they want to do is carry out the costly effort to restart production only to see the conflict revived and then have to shut it down once again,” Jones told Al Jazeera.
Getting production back online is also dependent on the impact individual producers have faced throughout the war.
Refineries that were shut as a precaution could reach as much as 95 percent capacity within 40-60 days, Vitol Bahrain’s head of research, Bader Nooruddin, told the Reuters news agency. Those damaged in the fighting could take much longer.
But bottlenecks at ports could be the biggest hurdle, according to Deal.
“There’s a lag time with shipping capacity. Shipping capacity is perhaps the most significant constraint,” Deal said.
This is because there are more than 500 ships still awaiting passage, according to shipping data from Kpler.
With the ships headed all over the world, it will take them weeks to reach their destinations, dock, and unload at the ports.
That also means a wave of empty ships is waiting in limbo for spots at ports to load cargo and ramp back up to normal operations.
Major shipping giants are in a holding pattern.
Norway’s Wallenius Wilhelmsen and Denmark’s Maersk both told Reuters that they have not changed their Middle East operations in the wake of the announcement.
During the war, there was limited passage through the Strait of Hormuz, with an average of 10 ships a day passing through, compared with 135 that normally transit the waterway, according to an analysis by Bloomberg.
“Tankers take months to reach their final destination and then come back again. So the ability to replenish the stocks is going to take until, I think, the early fall, just from a shipping perspective, to get back to the status quo that was in place before the conflict started,” Jones said, referring to the preferred term for the months of September through November in North America.
At the same time, US strategic reserves are running low, at their lowest levels since 1983. Reserves have tumbled by 18 percent since the war began.
“Demand might keep prices high through the summer as strategic reserves get refilled,” Deal added.
Jet fuel demand will also put pressure on consumers amid the normally busy JuneAugust travel season in the US.
“The war has really affected airlines and their ability to schedule and anticipate how the summer months are going to go,” Deal added.
In April, United Airlines CEO Scott Kirby said that airfares for the carrier may have to jump as much as 20 percent on higher fuel prices.
The increase in prices is also hitting food budgets.
The most recent consumer price index report showed US inflation ticked up by 4.2 percent compared with this time last year. While inflationary pressures were mostly driven by fuel prices, the impact has still been felt at the grocery store.
Almost half of the world’s urea, which is used in fertiliser, is produced in the Gulf region and passes through the Strait of Hormuz. For American farmers, that means access to fertilisers for the next crop season is more expensive.
Tomato prices, already driven up by Trump’s tariffs on Mexico, have surged 40 percent in the last year amid rising transportation costs.
Lettuce prices rose by more than 16 percent in May, and the price of ground beef increased by about 12 percent compared with this time last year.
Jones warned that food prices may not go down.
“Many retailers, wholesalers, and producers will keep them where they are or only reduce them if forced to from a sales perspective. Unlike petrol, which tends to ebb and flow with the price of oil, prices for many other goods that have been adversely affected by all of this are much less likely to return to where they were prior to the start of the conflict,” Jones said.
“For groceries, for manufacturing goods, for anything that has gone up during the conflict, the price that is there now often becomes the new baseline from which prices move in the future.”
This can be compared with the COVID-19 pandemic period. When the pandemic stalled supply chains, producers increased prices. A 2024 investigation by the Federal Trade Commission found that retail grocers kept prices elevated after supply chain constraints brought on by the pandemic had eased.
“Some in the grocery retail industry seem to have used rising costs as an opportunity to further raise prices to increase their profits,” the report said.
grandriver/E+ via Getty Images
Comstock Resources (CRK) said Monday it sold a 27% equity interest in its Pinnacle Gas Services midstream subsidiary to investment firm Sixth Street for $600M, valuing Pinnacle at a $2.2B enterprise value.
Comstock (CRK) said it retained a 73% controlling
The announcement of a preliminary US-Iran agreement has generated cautious optimism in Lebanon, where months of conflict have displaced large portions of the population and devastated communities across the south.
While the framework reportedly calls for the immediate cessation of military operations, Lebanese authorities are warning residents against assuming that conditions are safe enough for a rapid return.
The caution reflects uncertainty over how the agreement will be implemented and whether all parties will abide by its terms.
Adding to those concerns, Israel has made clear that it does not consider itself bound by the agreement and intends to maintain security zones in southern Lebanon.
Lebanon became one of the principal battlegrounds of the wider regional conflict after Hezbollah opened a front against Israel in support of Iran following the outbreak of hostilities.
The resulting escalation led to extensive Israeli military operations across southern Lebanon, causing widespread destruction and one of the largest displacement crises in the country’s recent history.
Entire communities were uprooted as residents fled bombardment and military activity.
Iran consistently pushed for any agreement with Washington to include provisions addressing Lebanon, viewing the conflict there as inseparable from broader regional tensions.
The inclusion of Lebanon in the framework agreement therefore represents a significant diplomatic concession and a central element of Tehran’s negotiating position.
Lebanon has become one of the clearest examples of how regional conflicts can produce devastating humanitarian consequences.
The conflict has:
A durable ceasefire could allow reconstruction efforts to begin and reduce the risk of further regional escalation.
However, the humanitarian benefits will depend on security conditions improving on the ground rather than merely on diplomatic declarations.
For displaced families, peace announcements do not automatically translate into confidence.
Many residents remain uncertain about:
The hesitation expressed by displaced residents reflects a broader reality in conflict zones: trust often takes much longer to rebuild than physical infrastructure.
Even if active fighting stops, communities may remain reluctant to return until they believe the risk of renewed conflict has genuinely diminished.
A major obstacle to immediate normalization is Israel’s position.
Israeli officials have indicated they will continue maintaining security zones and reserve the right to conduct operations they deem necessary for national security.
This creates ambiguity regarding implementation of the broader agreement.
While the US-Iran framework may establish a diplomatic foundation for reducing violence, the practical situation on the ground will depend on decisions made by actors who were not direct participants in the negotiations.
This distinction could prove crucial in determining whether the agreement produces lasting stability.
The inclusion of Lebanon in the agreement demonstrates how interconnected Middle Eastern conflicts have become.
The war was never confined solely to the United States and Iran. It involved multiple regional actors, proxy groups, and overlapping security concerns.
As a result, success will be measured not only by whether Washington and Tehran uphold their commitments but also by whether the agreement influences behavior across the broader region.
Lebanon is likely to become one of the first and most visible tests of that process.
The agreement creates an opportunity for Lebanon to move toward greater stability after months of destruction and displacement.
If implemented successfully, reduced hostilities could pave the way for reconstruction, humanitarian relief, and the gradual return of displaced populations.
Yet significant uncertainty remains. Security concerns, damaged infrastructure, and competing interpretations of the agreement could slow progress and complicate efforts to restore normalcy.
For many Lebanese families, the end of active conflict would represent only the beginning of a much longer recovery process.
The most revealing aspect of Lebanon’s reaction is the disconnect between diplomacy and reality.
International leaders may celebrate ceasefires and framework agreements, but people living through conflict judge peace by different standards. They look not at official statements but at troop movements, security conditions, and whether it is safe to return home.
That gap is already visible in southern Lebanon. While diplomats describe the agreement as a breakthrough, local authorities are warning residents against rushing back. Israel’s decision to maintain security zones further reinforces uncertainty about how quickly conditions can normalize.
This highlights a recurring challenge in conflict resolution. Agreements can stop wars on paper, but rebuilding trust often takes far longer than negotiating a ceasefire.
Lebanon’s experience may therefore become a key measure of whether the US-Iran agreement delivers meaningful change beyond diplomatic symbolism. If displaced communities can safely return, reconstruction begins, and violence declines, the agreement will gain credibility. If insecurity persists despite the deal, questions will quickly emerge about its effectiveness.
Ultimately, Lebanon represents the human dimension of the broader regional settlement. The success of the agreement will not be judged solely by geopolitical outcomes or energy markets but by whether ordinary people feel secure enough to rebuild their lives after months of war.
With information from Reuters.
The preliminary memorandum represents the first formal framework outlining how Washington and Tehran intend to move from military confrontation toward diplomacy.
While many details remain unpublished, statements from U.S., Iranian and Pakistani officials provide a broad outline of the deal’s structure.
Rather than resolving every dispute immediately, the agreement establishes a phased process aimed at reducing tensions first and addressing more difficult issues later.
The approach reflects the reality that both sides were able to reach consensus on ending hostilities more easily than on the underlying disputes that fueled the conflict.
The first stage focuses on immediate de-escalation.
According to mediator Pakistan, both sides have agreed to permanently halt military operations across all fronts.
The formal memorandum is expected to be signed in Switzerland, after which implementation would begin.
The objective of this phase is straightforward: stop active hostilities, reduce the risk of escalation, and create space for broader negotiations.
This represents the most immediate achievement of the agreement and is likely the reason markets reacted positively.
The reopening of the Strait of Hormuz is arguably the agreement’s most significant economic provision.
The waterway serves as one of the world’s most important energy transit routes and has been at the center of global concerns throughout the conflict.
Both sides indicate that commercial shipping will resume following the signing of the memorandum.
The restoration of maritime traffic could:
However, questions remain over how the route will be governed.
Iran has suggested it will coordinate management of traffic with Oman, potentially giving Tehran a more formal role in overseeing one of the world’s most strategically important waterways.
That issue could become a future source of diplomatic friction.
The most controversial subject in the negotiations remains unresolved.
Rather than settling the nuclear dispute immediately, both sides appear to have agreed to address it during a 60-day negotiation period.
According to Iranian officials, Tehran would freeze nuclear activities during that time by halting additional enrichment and refraining from expanding facilities.
The long-term future of Iran’s nuclear infrastructure remains unclear.
Washington continues to emphasize inspections and preventing Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon.
Tehran continues to insist that its nuclear program is peaceful and seeks recognition of its right to maintain civilian nuclear activities.
These competing positions are likely to dominate the next phase of talks.
Economic issues may ultimately prove as difficult as nuclear negotiations.
Iran expects meaningful sanctions relief as part of any final settlement.
Iranian officials have spoken about:
The Trump administration has signaled a more cautious approach.
Washington has indicated that sanctions relief will depend on Iranian compliance and future negotiations rather than automatic implementation.
This difference highlights one of the central tensions in the agreement: each side expects benefits on different timelines.
The agreement’s treatment of Lebanon illustrates how regional conflicts have become intertwined.
Iran views a ceasefire in Lebanon as a critical component of the broader settlement.
Lebanese political leaders have welcomed the inclusion of Lebanon in the framework.
Israel, however, has made clear that it does not consider itself bound by all aspects of the agreement and intends to maintain military positions in areas it views as strategically important.
This creates uncertainty about whether the Lebanon component can be implemented as envisioned.
The issue could quickly become one of the first tests of the agreement’s durability.
The memorandum matters because it shifts the conflict from the battlefield to the negotiating table.
The agreement addresses several immediate concerns:
At the same time, it leaves the most difficult questions unresolved.
This means the framework should be viewed as the beginning of a diplomatic process rather than its conclusion.
Its success will depend on whether negotiators can transform temporary understandings into binding commitments.
The memorandum creates a framework for de-escalation, but its long-term success remains uncertain.
If implemented effectively, the agreement could stabilize energy markets, reduce regional tensions, and create momentum for broader diplomatic engagement.
However, many of the issues that triggered the conflict remain unresolved.
Nuclear enrichment, sanctions, regional security arrangements, and competing strategic interests are all likely to generate difficult negotiations.
The coming 60 days will therefore be more important than the announcement itself.
They will determine whether the framework becomes a durable peace process or merely a temporary pause in a conflict whose underlying disputes remain intact.
The structure of the agreement reveals a pragmatic calculation by both Washington and Tehran.
Rather than attempting to solve every dispute at once, negotiators prioritized issues where agreement was achievable: ending active hostilities, reopening shipping routes, and creating a mechanism for future talks.
This approach reflects the political realities facing both governments.
For President Trump, reducing energy prices and ending a costly conflict addresses growing domestic pressure. For Iran, halting military operations while preserving room to negotiate on sanctions and nuclear issues offers a path to economic relief without immediate capitulation.
Yet the framework’s greatest strength may also be its greatest weakness.
By postponing the hardest questions, the agreement creates momentum for diplomacy but also leaves significant room for disagreement later. Nuclear enrichment, sanctions relief, and regional security arrangements are not peripheral issues—they are the core disputes that drove the conflict.
As a result, the memorandum should be viewed less as a peace treaty and more as a diplomatic bridge. It lowers immediate risks and creates opportunities for negotiation, but it does not yet resolve the strategic rivalry between the United States and Iran.
Whether this becomes a historic breakthrough or a temporary truce will depend on what happens after the signatures are placed on the document. The real negotiations are only beginning.
With information from Reuters.
Fox Corporation has agreed to acquire the streaming platform Roku Inc. in a deal valued at $22 billion, the companies announced Monday.
The deal will combine the Murdoch family’s media assets, which include its news, sports and broadcast channels, with the San Jose-based streaming platform that reaches 100 million consumers globally.
The acquisition would give Fox access to consumer households at a time when the traditional pay-TV universe continues its slow decline as viewers move away from cable and satellite services to video streaming. Fox already owns the free ad-supported streaming service Tubi, which recently became profitable.
“This is a defining moment for Fox and a natural extension of the deliberate and focused strategy we have been executing for nearly a decade,” Fox Corp. Executive Chair Lachlan Murdoch said in a statement.
By owning Roku, Fox gets access to data from the 100 million households connected to the service, which can be used to better target audiences with advertising. The combination would also make Fox less dependent on traditional pay TV platforms for the distribution of its channels.
According to Nielsen data, 21% of all internet-connected TV viewing comes through Roku. The Roku Channel, which carries 500 ad-supported streaming networks, accounts for 3% of all TV viewing.
An image of a Roku branded TV.
(Roku)
Research firm Emarketer projects ad revenues of $3.57 billion for Roku this year, up 19% from last year.
Lloyd Grief, chief executive of the Los Angeles investment bank Greif & Co., said Roku would have been challenged to compete against far better capitalized competitors in the streaming business and that a sale was “inevitable.”
For Fox, the proposed deal makes them a larger player in the digital advertising business. Emarketer senior analyst Ross Benes said the Roku business will “more than double,” the company’s revenues in that area.
“It remains to be seen how well the combination of a digitally innovating streaming company will mesh with a media conglomerate rooted in legacy assets,” Benes said.. “But the strategy makes sense and it jibes with the continual consolidation that’s occurring in streaming.”
Fox sold its TV and movie production assets to Walt Disney Co. in 2018. Rather than invest heavily in scripted entertainment to compete with emerging streaming companies, Fox decided to concentrate on sports and news.
The Roku deal will put Fox deeper into the distribution network. Over its history, the company has held stakes in satellite TV provider DirecTV and Sky TV.
The companies said they are committed to keeping Roku as a “partner-friendly” platform that carries program services that compete with Fox. Brian Wieser, a consultant at Madison and Wall said that might require some convincing.
“Other content owners may still need Roku’s distribution, but they may be less comfortable with the idea that one of their competitors controls an increasingly important part of the streaming interface,” Wieser wrote in his note on the proposed deal.
Roku shareholders will receive a combination of cash and Fox Corporation stock valued at $160 a share.
The companies say they expect cost savings of $400 million in the combined entity.
Roku was founded in 2002 by Anthony Wood, a British digital entrepreneur. The company launched a streaming device, the Roku player, in 2008. Within six years, the company sold more than 10 million devices, as the popularity of streaming video rapidly grew.
Fox Corp. shares were down 10 to 15% on news of the deal, trading around $55.57 Monday morning. Roku shares were down slightly to $142.
Times staff writer Wendy Lee contributed to this report.
Governments across the world have welcomed the tentative deal between the US and Iran to end the war, calling it a major diplomatic breakthrough. But Israeli politicians have been quick to criticise it, claiming it would undermine Israel’s security.
Published On 15 Jun 202615 Jun 2026
Share
Israeli journalist Gideon Levy says the US-Iran announcement represents a personal defeat for Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his ambitions against Iran and Lebanon. His relationship with US President Donald Trump could also be at risk if Israel jeopardises the deal.
Published On 15 Jun 202615 Jun 2026
Share
EXPLAINER
US President Donald Trump and Iranian leaders say a deal has been agreed to end more than 100 days of war that killed thousands.
By Agence France Presse and Reuters
Published On 15 Jun 202615 Jun 2026
United States President Donald Trump and Iran’s Deputy Foreign Minister Kazem Gharibabadi said on Sunday that they had reached an initial deal to end the war and to resume traffic through the Strait of Hormuz.
Trump said the deal allows for toll-free shipping through the Strait of Hormuz, which has been largely closed since the US and Israel launched an assault on Iran on February 28.
“The Deal with the Islamic Republic of Iran is now complete,” Trump wrote on Truth Social on Sunday.
The US and Iran will sign a memorandum of understanding in Switzerland on Friday, said the prime minister of Pakistan, whose country has served as a mediator.
Monday marks 108 days since the war began, with the US and Israel’s attacks on Iran. Here is what’s happening:
The US and Iran say they have reached a deal to end fighting on all fronts and open the Strait of Hormuz. Al Jazeera’s Osama Bin Javaid explains how both sides are claiming victory, even as tough negotiations over the details still lie ahead.
Published On 15 Jun 202615 Jun 2026
Share
Under the agreement, the key Strait of Hormuz waterway will be reopened, US President Donald Trump said.
Source link
WASHINGTON — President Trump said Sunday that the United States and Iran have reached a framework agreement to end the war in the Middle East, a breakthrough in months of negotiations aimed at ending the conflict.
The deal, described by diplomats as a memorandum of understanding, commits Tehran to forgo the development or acquisition of nuclear weapons in exchange for helping reopen the Strait of Hormuz, and the paced release of its assets frozen overseas, upon the signing of the deal Friday in Switzerland.
Trump said he has also authorized “the immediate removal of the United States Naval blockade” on Iranian imports.
“Ships of the World, start your engines. Let the oil flow!” Trump wrote in a social media post Sunday evening. It was the president’s 80th birthday.
The full details of the agreement have not been released. Many details — including how Tehran would give up, destroy or dilute its fissile material, or whether Iran would continue treating the international strait as its sovereign waters — will continue to be negotiated in the coming days.
Pakistani Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif said Sunday that mediators are planning to hold a series of meetings this week to “lay the foundation for the technical talks and the official signing ceremony.”
“We would like to thank the United States of America and the Islamic Republic of Iran for their commitment to finding a diplomatic solution to the conflict,” Sharif wrote in a post on X.
The Associated Press reported that negotiations on outstanding issues like Iran’s nuclear program would continue over the next 60 days, according to two senior Pakistani officials who spoke on condition of anonymity.
Vice President JD Vance told Fox News that the White House is “still figuring out the logistics” on whether he or Trump will attend the signing ceremony.
“What we know is that we have a lot of work to do, but a very big win for the American people tonight,” Vance said.”We are just going to keep on working at it, keep on driving energy prices down, keep on ensuring that region of the world is less than a basket case and finally, and most importantly, celebrate, that we can say with confidence Iran will never have a nuclear weapon.”
Iran’s deputy foreign minister, Kazem Gharibabadi, confirmed the agreement on state television but said Iran would not start implementing it until it was signed on Friday. He said the deal followed over 14 hours of talks in Tehran with a representative from Qatar, another mediator.
Iranian state TV showed a banner asserting: “US was forced to sign an agreement to end the war.”
Iran’s commitment to refrain from pursuing nuclear weapons would simply repeat a vow Iran has made several times before, including in its signing of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and its nuclear deal brokered with international powers under the Obama administration over 10 years ago.
Iran has 972 pounds of uranium that is enriched up to 60% purity, a short, technical step from weapons-grade levels of 90%, according to the International Atomic Energy Agency. Under the 2015 international agreement with Iran abandoned by the first Trump administration, Iran’s uranium enrichment was capped at less than 4%, monitored by IAEA inspectors.
The vagueness of the new agreement, the demand for further negotiations to flesh out its details, and the pacing of sanctions relief for Iran are all likely to draw criticism of the president, who launched his political career in 2015 by attacking President Obama’s newly signed nuclear deal as a historically bad agreement.
That deal, known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, followed two years of painstaking negotiations that were predicated on a similar, yet more detailed framework, called the JCPOA.
Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said in a Sunday morning interview on CBS’ “Face the Nation” that the the difference between the JCPOA and how the Trump administration is handling negotiations is the “threat of military force.”
“The huge difference is we did this from a position of strength,” Hegseth said. “That military might will stay as long as necessary.”
And, as in 2015, Israeli leadership across the political aisle remains deeply skeptical of the agreement, pronouncing they will not be bound by a deal to which they are not a party.
In a phone interview with the New York Times on Sunday afternoon, Trump called Benjamin Netanyahu, the prime minister of Israel, a “very difficult guy.”
“To be honest with you, he should be very thankful to us for doing this. Because if Iran had a nuclear weapon, Israel wouldn’t be around for two hours,” Trump said.
Since the U.S.-Israeli attacks on Iran that started the war Feb. 28, there have been 3,468 confirmed deaths in Iran, according to independent monitors. In addition, 13 U.S. service members have been killed, and the Israeli war with Hezbollah has killed 2,679 in Lebanon as well as 23 Israelis, including eight civilians.
Dan Perry: The US ‘may pretend’ that Israel can’t attack Hezbollah ‘in order to get this deal done’. Israeli affairs analyst Dan Perry explains how the US, Israel and Iran may react as they get closer to a potential agreement.
Published On 14 Jun 202614 Jun 2026
Share
Israel has bombed the southern suburbs of Beirut, saying it targeted Hezbollah ‘infrastructure’ in response to cross-border fire. The strikes come as Israel continues to violate a supposed ceasefire with incursions and daily bombardment in southern Lebanon. Trump has said a deal to end the war on Iran will be signed on Sunday.
Published On 14 Jun 202614 Jun 2026
Share
The US president’s comments come as Iran says an exact date has not been decided, but it “will not be tomorrow”.
Source link
June 13 (UPI) — President Donald Trump and Pakistan have said that a memorandum of understanding extending the cease-fire between the United States and Iran will be virtually signed Sunday, though Iran has not confirmed the meeting.
Trump posted on Truth Social at 12:45 p.m. EDT Saturday: “The Deal is scheduled to get signed tomorrow, and immediately after it is signed, the Hormuz Strait is OPEN TO ALL.”
He also posted a screenshot of a Saturday morning tweet by Pakistani Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif: “We are closer to a peace deal than ever before. With finalization expected in the next 24 hours, Pakistan is preparing for the electronic signing of the peace deal immediately after, followed by technical level talks next week.”
The Pakistani foreign minister confirmed that the signing was set for Sunday, Axios reported.
But Iran said there were no talks planned for Sunday. Iranian Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Esmail Baghaei said there were no plans for an Iranian negotiating team to travel to Geneva or elsewhere in the next day or two, according to IRIB, Iran’s state broadcaster, The New York Times reported. While Iran could also sign electronically, it’s unclear if the signing event will happen.
One of the main reasons the signing will be virtual is that Vice President JD Vance, who has been negotiating the peace deal, wouldn’t be able to go to the signings and be back in the United States before Trump leaves for the G7 summit in France Monday, Axios said.
Also, Sunday is the president’s 80th birthday and the day of the UFC fight on the White House lawn.
United States President Donald Trump has said an initial agreement to end the US-Israeli war with Iran is “scheduled to get signed tomorrow”.
But that announcement, made on Trump’s Truth Social account on Saturday, contradicts an earlier statement by Iranian Ministry of Foreign Affairs spokesman Esmaeil Baghaei.
list of 3 itemsend of list
In remarks carried by Iran’s IRNA news agency, Baghaei said a memorandum of understanding would not be signed on Sunday and that negotiators are not planning to travel immediately to Geneva, Switzerland, in preparation for such an event.
According to Baghaei, a signing could happen “in the coming days”.
Hours later, Trump wrote, “The Deal is scheduled to get signed tomorrow, and immediately after it is signed, the Hormuz Strait is OPEN TO ALL.” Sunday marks Trump’s 80th birthday.
In recent days, Iran and the US have repeatedly contradicted each other when describing the details of the anticipated agreement, even as both sides have broadly signalled that a deal was closer than ever before.
Still, no terms have been officially released, with US and Iranian officials on Friday stressing that the agreement had not been finalised.
Beyond opening the Strait of Hormuz, Trump said in Saturday’s post that the agreement would be a “A WALL TO NO NUCLEAR WEAPON!” and that “no money would exchange hands”.
Trump also maintained that “at the appropriate time, when all is calm, we will go in and get the Nuclear Dust”, referring to Iran’s stockpile of enriched uranium.
But speaking on Iran’s Press TV on Friday, Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said the initial memorandum of understanding would only be a launch point for negotiations about the future of Iran’s nuclear programme.
He added that the signing would result in an immediate pause in fighting, but that Iran and Oman would continue to administer the Strait of Hormuz.
The issue of lifting foreign sanctions against Iran and unfreezing the country’s assets would be discussed following the signing of the memorandum of understanding, Araghchi said.
The latest flurry of diplomacy came after the US and Iran traded strikes for two days this week, threatening to end a pause in fighting that has persisted since April 8.
The US and Israel launched the war on Iran on February 28, amid ongoing indirect talks on the future of Iran’s nuclear programme.
The US and Israel had also launched a 12-day war on Iran in 2025, during another round of nuclear talks.
Iranian officials have said that deep distrust towards the US has slowed the progress towards creating a lasting agreement to bring the current war to an end.
Trump, meanwhile, has repeatedly pledged to reach a deal that would surpass the 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), struck under his Democratic rival, former President Barack Obama.
That agreement, from which Trump unilaterally withdrew in 2018, saw Tehran agree to limit its nuclear programme and allow for international inspections in exchange for sanctions relief.
For years, Iran has maintained that it is building a nuclear programme for civilian use only and is not seeking a nuclear weapon.
In his post on Truth Social, Trump again pledged that any deal reached would be more stringent than the JCPOA.
“Our relationship with Iran is a much different and better one than previous Administrations have had,” he said.
“Hopefully, this process will all work out quickly, easily, and smoothly,” he added.
“If it doesn’t, we have the ultimate alternative, hopefully never to be used again!” he wrote, without elaborating on what his threat meant.
Henry Ensher, a former US ambassador, says the US–Iran agreement is not a final settlement but only the start of a process, with many ways it could still go wrong.
Published On 13 Jun 202613 Jun 2026
Share