MoU

For the ninth consecutive night, the United States mounted attacks on Iran’s defence facilities and maritime capabilities into the early hours of Monday, with Tehran hitting back in tit-for-tat strikes as warning sirens blared in neighbouring Gulf countries and Jordan, home to US military bases.

Both sides have accused each other of violating the memorandum of understanding (MoU) they had signed in Islamabad, Pakistan, on June 17. US President Donald Trump has said he views the truce as over, while Iran has said it no longer intends to adhere to the MoU.

Meanwhile, the Strait of Hormuz — through which 20 percent of the world’s oil and gas passed during peacetime — is shut again, sending crude prices shooting up yet again. On Sunday, the US military said another American service member had been killed late last week, bringing the total number of deaths to 17.

So, what has changed in the last two months for the US, Iran and the Gulf countries as the MoU has unravelled in terms of economic impact, widening of military targets, and how they view the war?

Economy

The Strait of Hormuz — the kill switch of the global economy — has been closed down by Iranian authorities, warning that not even a drop of oil shall pass through the waterway amid US attacks and a naval blockade against Iran’s ports.

The MoU had paved a path for the reopening of the strait. And that had briefly pulled oil prices to par with pre-war levels.

The GCC

The strait is of critical importance, especially for Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) states, which saw their economic security and energy strategy severely affected by export curbs. The war on Iran has brought about the largest disruption to global oil and liquefied natural gas (LNG) supplies in modern history.

The costs go beyond just energy revenue losses, noted Mohammad Reza Farzanegan, an economist at Germany’s Marburg University.

“The conflict also threatens the GCC countries’ diversification strategies. Tourism, aviation, logistics, construction, real estate and foreign investment all depend on perceptions of regional stability,” he told Al Jazeera. “Continued war increases insurance and transport costs and encourages investors and tourists to reconsider their exposure to the region.”

Iran

For Iran, the MoU lifted the naval blockade against Iranian ports and offered oil and banking sanctions waivers, and Tehran rushed to export tens of millions of barrels of crude oil.

The earlier US blockade had curbed Iranian exports, with Iran’s parliament speaker and chief negotiator, Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, telling Iranian state TV in an interview last month that “we did not export even one barrel” during the blockade.

However, as fighting resumed, the US disabled a vessel in the Strait of Hormuz, reported to be carrying Iranian crude. Tehran has also hit commercial vessels in the waterway, and the US has been bombing Iran’s coastal areas since then.

“[The renewed US naval blockade] is more damaging than conventional sanctions because the restrictions are now enforced physically,” said Farzanegan. “Iran therefore has much less room to use intermediaries, alternative flags and informal shipping arrangements to maintain oil exports.”

“The immediate consequences are lower foreign-exchange revenues, further depreciation of the rial and stronger inflationary pressure,” the economist told Al Jazeera.

Iran’s economy has been suffering from one of the world’s highest inflation rates. The rial touched nearly 1.9 million against the US dollar this week, a new all-time low. The Tehran Stock Exchange’s main index lost another 120,000 points or 2.4 percent on Saturday to stand at 4.77 million.

The US

Trump’s war has been widely unpopular in the US. The president recorded a 60 percent disapproval rating on the economy, as per the latest CNBC polling, with a net approval rating of -22, reported to be the lowest of his political career.

As per the poll, 61 percent of respondents said they are pessimistic about the state of the economy, the highest percentage since December 2023.

“The effects are most visible in energy prices and consumer purchasing power. This increases household costs and complicates the political position of President Trump and Republican candidates ahead of the November 2026 congressional elections,” said Farzanegan.

Military

The US

The US military has had 17 personnel killed in the war with Iran so far. Three of them have been killed since the resumption of the war about 10 days ago.

“We hit them very hard again tonight,” Trump said on Sunday, adding, “We did that in honour of the – probably three – it’s probably three great patriots.”

Two US personnel were killed in an Iranian attack on an airbase in Jordan on Friday, and a third is missing. Another soldier was killed last week in Iraq while defusing unexploded ordnance from an Iranian drone.

Tehran has claimed to have hit several US military facilities in Kuwait, Bahrain, and Jordan, including an aircraft at Aqaba airport.

Al Jazeera could not immediately verify the extent of damage to any facilities.

The Gulf

The renewed attacks from Iran on most Gulf countries, as well as Jordan, have forced them to deploy their interceptors. GCC countries had already used hundreds of expensive interceptors during the first phase of the US-Israel war on Iran in March and April.

But the Iranian military’s attacks have also hit civilian infrastructure in Gulf countries. The bombing of power and desalination plants in Kuwait has drawn widespread regional condemnation.

“What is happening is a severe shock to the GCC countries,” Nader Habibi, an Iranian-American economist, told Al Jazeera. “Now, after the disruptions of the past seven months, even as they have tried to avoid getting involved, the civilian population is indirectly impacted.”

Iran

The US insists that it has focused its attacks on Iran’s military infrastructure, especially on the country’s southern islands — some of which act as forward military or surveillance posts, and others that are believed to host missile bunkers.

But Tehran has accused the US of targeting civilian infrastructure as well in recent days, including bridges and tunnels, ports and dock facilities, power stations and water plants. Iranian officials have said more than 50 people have been killed and about 500 wounded in US attacks in the past three weeks.

Narrative

More than the war itself, a significant part of the messaging from the US and Iran has been over the control of the Strait of Hormuz.

The US

Washington says its renewed attacks are aimed at degrading Iranian capabilities to disrupt maritime traffic in the waterway, with Trump saying last week that “the US controls the Strait”.

Iran

Tehran has pushed back on Trump’s claim.

Farzanegan said Iran’s “ability to influence shipping through the Strait of Hormuz remains a unique source of bargaining power”. “Tehran is therefore prepared to bear considerable costs to preserve this leverage.”

He added that Iran may also calculate that extending part of the economic costs to neighbouring oil-exporting countries will encourage these governments to use their political influence in Washington and push the US towards negotiations.

“This appears to be one reason why Iran is prepared to maintain pressure in the Strait despite the considerable costs to its own economy,” the analyst added.

Aniseh Tabrizi, an associate fellow on the Middle East and North Africa Programme at think tank Chatham House in London, said the significant change since the MoU unravelled “is that there is less optimism than before about diplomacy being feasible”.

“For all the sides,
it is difficult to foresee a scenario in which another deal is not only reached, but also implemented successfully,” she told Al Jazeera. “And that makes it particularly concerning for all the parties involved.”

Tabrizi noted that there appears to be “no imminent drive” from the Iranian side to sign a deal. “They are still maintaining escalatory attacks, but also reciprocating the kind of attacks that are conducted against the country,” she said.

The Gulf

GCC countries have continued to condemn Iran’s attacks on the regional countries, while calling for diplomacy to dial down the escalation. They have made it clear that Iran’s unilateral control over the Strait of Hormuz would not be acceptable to them.

Tabrizi added that, like the weeks before the Islamabad MoU, regional countries, especially Qatar, are still batting for talks.

If anything, Farzanegan said, the economic losses can bring all the sides to the table again for talks.

“Higher economic losses increase the incentives for negotiations,” he said. “A return to negotiations becomes more likely when both sides conclude that continued escalation cannot improve their bargaining position.”

Economist Habibi agreed that if an agreement is reached again, “it would be primarily because of the stability of the economic pressures on both sides”. However, he added that the probability of escalation in the next couple of weeks is higher than the probability of negotiation.

The United States and Iran have traded attacks for a second day, straining their fragile ceasefire further after US President Donald Trump said the truce was “over”.

The US military said late on Wednesday that the attacks were aimed at Iran’s “ability to threaten the freedom of navigation in the Strait of Hormuz”.

The US struck approximately 90 military targets, including missile and drone storage as well as logistics sites along Iran’s coastline, said the Central Command (CENTCOM), which oversees US military operations in the Middle East.

In a post on his Truth Social platform, Trump called the US attacks “retribution for yesterday’s bombing of ships by Iran. If it happens again, it will get much worse!”

The latest attacks come a day after the US said it hit more than 80 targets in Iran in response to Iranian attacks on commercial vessels in the Strait of Hormuz.

Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) said on Thursday it carried out attacks on “key infrastructure and facilities” at bases used by the US military in Arifjan and Ali Al Salem in Kuwait, and Juffair and Sheikh Isa in Bahrain in response to the latest US bombardment.

The Iranian army later said its forces targeted a Patriot missile system in Kuwait, a satellite antenna in Qatar and US military fuel depots in Bahrain.

Kuwait’s Ministry of Defence said it was intercepting missiles and drones, while Qatar issued an “elevated security threat” alert.

The renewed fighting threatens to undermine a memorandum of understanding (MoU) the two sides agreed last month to extend an April ceasefire and gradually reopen the Strait of Hormuz to shipping.

The attacks come a day after Trump said the ceasefire with Iran was “over” and criticised the Iranian leadership. However, he left the door open to more talks and suggested that any strikes would end quickly.

Speaking to reporters on board Air Force One as he travelled back to the US after attending the NATO summit in Turkiye, Trump said the Iranian side had “called a little while ago” and that they wanted “to make a deal so badly”.

US attacks across Iran

US strikes hit a railway bridge in Iran’s northeast, according to several official media, and the news agency IRNA reported strikes on a military base in coastal Bushehr, which hosts the nation’s only civilian nuclear power plant.

The Iranian railway (IRIR) said the train service on the Tehran-Mashhad line had been temporarily suspended as a result.

It said technical teams were on site to repair the damaged section so that the rail service could resume as soon as possible, adding that buses had been arranged to transport affected passengers.

Warplanes hovered over Iran’s Kish Island, and explosions rocked the port cities of Bandar Abbas, Konarak and Chabahar, part of which lost electricity, IRNA reported.

At least three people were killed in an attack on the outskirts of Ahvaz, capital of the southwestern province of Khuzestan, IRNA reported, citing the deputy governor of the region.

At least one firefighter was killed in an attack on an airport facility in Iranshahr, IRNA reported.

Iran’s Health Ministry said at least 14 people were killed and 78 others injured over the past two days.

Calls for diplomacy

In mid-June, the US and Iran signed an MoU to extend their ceasefire. It also led to the lifting of the US naval blockade of Iran and the gradual reopening of the Strait of Hormuz.

The MoU came following mediation by Pakistan and Qatar, which served as a launch point for 60 days of talks on more intractable issues, including the future of Iran’s nuclear programme, the administration of the Strait of Hormuz and access to billions of dollars in frozen Iranian funds.

Since US-Israeli strikes triggered war in February, Tehran has effectively blocked the strait, threatening to hit vessels that deviate from its authorised route.

Reporting from Tehran, Al Jazeera’s Resul Serdar Atas said the US and Iran are “stuck in an equation – almost a deadlock” over the Strait of Hormuz.

“For the Americans, they say that Iran will not have control over the Strait of Hormuz. For the Iranians, control of the strait is indispensable.”

He said Iran sees control over the strait as the “ultimate deterrent, and if it gives that up, then it loses its negotiating position” with the US.

The US hopes that by targeting infrastructure that affects Iran’s ability to control the strait, including maritime traffic control centres, it will be forced to “return to the MoU”, Scott Uehlinger, a former senior CIA officer, told Al Jazeera.

United Nations chief Antonio Guterres called “on all parties to exercise maximum restraint”, as did Pakistan.

Qatari ⁠Prime ⁠Minister Sheikh Mohammed bin Abdulrahman bin Jassim Al Thani told Iranian Foreign ⁠Minister Abbas Araghchi in a phone ⁠call on Thursday that Iran and the US should commit to diplomacy.

Sheikh Mohammed, who is also the foreign minister, said Washington and Tehran should implement the MoU to end the war.

Iran said the two officials had spoken over the phone and “underscored the importance of using diplomatic means to resolve regional issues”.

The memorandum of understanding (MoU) the United States and Iran have signed is not a peace treaty. It is not even a credible framework for one. A vocal chorus of critics has rushed to portray it as a humiliation – evidence that President Donald Trump was manoeuvred into negotiations and extracted a poor deal from a regime that outplayed him.

That reading mistakes a mirage for reality. The Trump administration entered these talks with a precise understanding of what the Iranian regime is, what it wants and what any agreement with it is actually worth. No one in that negotiating team harbours the illusion that Tehran intends to honour commitments that constrain its core ambitions. The MоU is not a peace settlement. It is a mutually understood pause – a tactical intermission chosen by both sides for reasons that have nothing to do with trust and everything to do with time.

To grasp why, one needs only consult Iran’s unbroken record. That record is not a matter of interpretation or political dispute. It is a documented history of agreements made, commitments given and obligations systematically abandoned whenever honouring them conflicted with the regime’s objectives.

The pattern is consistent enough to constitute a doctrine: Iran negotiates under pressure, signs what is necessary to relieve that pressure and resumes its course once the immediate threat has passed.

The deeply flawed 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) was the most prominent recent demonstration of this cycle. Presented as a landmark of multilateral diplomacy, it was in practice a subsidised intermission – a breathing space Iran used to consolidate resources, sustain its proxy networks and continue advancing its strategic programme. The JCPOA did not change Iranian behaviour. It funded and protected it.

The Trump administration’s “maximum pressure” campaign was a direct response to that lesson: A regime of this kind cannot be managed through diplomatic lifelines. It can only be constrained by pressure severe enough to leave it no viable alternative to compliance.

The new MoU does not signal that Iran has changed. Its calculus remains what it has always been – survival and expansion, pursued through whatever tactical posture the moment requires. When pressure mounts, Iran negotiates. When pressure eases, Iran advances. Its negotiators are, by all available evidence, prepared to offer assurances they have no intention of keeping. This is not a failure of diplomatic craftsmanship. This is simply the nature of any negotiation with a regime like Iran’s.

Nowhere is this more apparent than in the Iranian nuclear programme. As a signatory to the Non-Proliferation Treaty, Iran has repeatedly committed to transparent cooperation with the International Atomic Energy Agency. It has repeatedly broken those commitments, blocking inspections, constructing clandestine enrichment facilities, destroying evidence and systematically deceiving the international community. The pattern is not one of occasional noncompliance. It is deliberate, sustained deception in pursuit of a single unwavering objective: the acquisition of a nuclear weapon.

A state genuinely committed to civilian nuclear energy has no need for a vast and enormously expensive domestic enrichment programme. Nuclear fuel can be purchased – from Russia, among others – at a fraction of the cost and without the international confrontation such a programme inevitably provokes.

Iran has chosen the far more costly and dangerous path for one reason: Enrichment is not a means to an end, but the end itself. Its rulers are committed to a nuclear weapon, and that commitment has survived changes in personnel, shifts in rhetoric and decades of pressure.

It will not be bargained away – and here lies the critical point that no amount of diplomatic optimism can paper over. Iran’s rulers are not pragmatic actors engaged in a conventional cost-benefit calculation. Their goals are theological and strategic in a way that places them beyond the reach of ordinary negotiation.

They do not govern in the interests of the Iranian people. The sanctions they have endured have devastated ordinary Iranians – driven up poverty, hollowed out the middle class, denied the population access to medicines and opportunity. None of that has moved the regime one degree from its course.

This is a regime that could, if it chose, transform its position entirely. It could make peace with its neighbours, normalise relations with the international community, shed the sanctions that have devastated its economy and dramatically improve the lives of Iranians. The price is not beyond reach: abandon the nuclear weapons programme, cease development of offensive ballistic missiles and end the sponsorship of terrorist proxies. Iran’s rulers have refused that bargain consistently and completely.

That is the essential context for understanding what the Trump administration is actually doing. It would be a serious misjudgement to read this MoU as evidence of American weakness or strategic confusion. The team that designed and executed the most effective pressure campaign against Iran in recent memory is not naive about this adversary.

Trump enters this pause knowing that Iran will not honour commitments that genuinely constrain it. He is not expecting otherwise. Neither side, in all likelihood, operates under any such illusion – which is precisely what makes the critics’ alarm about a “bad deal” somewhat beside the point.

You cannot be cheated by an agreement you never expected the other party to keep.

What this MoU represents is a mutually understood strategic pause, a breathing space both parties have chosen, for entirely different reasons, over immediate confrontation. Iran needs economic relief. A regime facing internal decay and a depleted treasury has strong incentives to buy time, replenish its resources and wait out what it calculates to be a finite window.

Tehran is acutely aware that Trump has roughly two and a half years remaining in office. From its perspective, survival through that period is itself a form of victory.

Washington’s calculus is different in kind. Keeping the Strait of Hormuz open is an immediate, non-negotiable goal – a choked strait means an energy price shock with global consequences. Beyond that, the US has its own repositioning to accomplish. Military inventories drawn down through recent operations are being restocked. Strategic options are being preserved and expanded.

A pause that enables that rebuilding, while avoiding a premature confrontation on unfavourable terms, is not a concession. It is preparation.

Trump has never wavered in his commitment to eliminating Iran as a strategic threat – not through wishful diplomacy, but through the kind of pressure that forecloses options. That commitment did not expire with the signing of this MoU. The question for Tehran is not whether American resolve exists but whether it can be outlasted. That is a wager the Iranian regime has made before and lost.

The international community will, as usual, observe from a careful distance. Many nations will urge Iran to be stopped while taking few steps to stop it, criticising US action and inaction with equal facility.

Trump understands this dynamic. It is the foundation of his approach to alliances – the insistence that partners bear proportionate burdens rather than simply drawing on American resolve while contributing little of their own.

The MoU will not resolve the Iranian problem. It was not designed to. When its terms expire or when Iran decides it has served its purpose, the nuclear programme will resume its advance, the proxies will be better resourced, and the Strait of Hormuz will once again become a flashpoint.

That outcome is not a possibility. Given Iran’s record, it is a near-certainty. The only consequential variable is whether the US and those willing to stand alongside it will be better positioned to act decisively when that moment arrives. Far from a mirage, the evidence suggests that is precisely what this administration is working to ensure.

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Al Jazeera’s editorial policy.

Tehran, Iran – The memorandum of understanding (MoU) signed last week between Iran and the United States appears to be in jeopardy after a second day of military strikes, as well as the a framework agreement that entrenches Israeli forces on Lebanese soil.

The Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) on Sunday released video showing the launch of ballistic missiles overnight, with a message written on them in English and Persian saying US President Donald Trump was insisting on a “defeated war”.

The IRGC said it had fired missiles and drones towards the US Ali Al Salem airbase in Kuwait and the US Fifth Naval Fleet in Bahrain in retaliation for a second day of US strikes. It threatened more attacks if the deal is violated again by the “deceitful” US, which, along with Israel launched air attacks across Iran on February 28.

The exchanges of fire come after the US coordinated the transit of vessels out of the Strait of Hormuz in cooperation with Oman and the International Maritime Organization.

Many ships were being directed through Oman’s waters, which prompted the IRGC to hit a container ship and a tanker with explosive-laden drones in an attempt to force traffic to pass through Iranian waters instead.

Speaking to reporters in neighbouring Iraq on Sunday, Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said Iran will exercise sole management and oversight of the critical waterway for the next 30 days before allowing full traffic to resume.

He also emphasised the first clause of the June 17 MoU, which says military operations must immediately and permanently end on all fronts, including Lebanon, and urged Washington to exert pressure on Israel to stop attacking southern Lebanon.

The governments of Israel and Lebanon reached a US-brokered framework deal on Friday that allows Israeli forces to remain in southern Lebanon, until Tehran-backed Hezbollah is fully disarmed. That appears to contradict the MoU signed with Iran.

Hezbollah swiftly rejected the agreement, calling it “humiliating, shameful and a surrender” of Lebanon’s sovereignty.

Negar Mortazavi, a senior fellow at the Center for International Policy, said she expected the Lebanon issue to negatively impact the MoU because Hezbollah was not on board and the Lebanese government’s previous ceasefire deals with Israel have been repeatedly violated.

She also told Al Jazeera that Iran has found tremendous leverage with the Strait of Hormuz, treating it as a “golden card”, as the disruption to oil exports has heavily impacted markets and made the war unpopular among many, including in the US.

“They are using that leverage to the max and not going back to the status before the war, pretending like no war happened,” she said, adding that Iranian authorities and the IRGC have sought to centre themselves in the process of coordinating transit through the strait.

“They’re saying they want traffic to go through in coordination with them, and I think they will be able to exert that kind of power,” she said.

On Saturday, Iran’s President Masoud Pezeshkian, Speaker and chief negotiator Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf and judiciary chief Gholam-Hossein Mohseni-Ejei released an image of their first publicised trilateral meeting since the start of the war more than four months ago.

Supreme Leader Mojtaba Khamenei has not been seen or heard from since succeeding his father, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, who was killed in a US-Israeli attack on the first day of the war. But a new written text message attributed to him on Sunday said: “What is certain is that the criminals must be seized by the collar and made to face the punishment for their criminal acts”.

Supporters of the Islamic Republic cheered on the latest IRGC attacks against US interests as they continued demonstrating on the streets overnight into Sunday as hardline politicians and analysts called for further attacks until Iran gets better concessions.

On the state-linked talk show, Tamam Rokh, political analysts said Tehran should significantly strengthen its ties with Moscow and Beijing.

“We could do many things with help from Russia and China to damage US strategic equipment in the region like vessels, refuelling aircraft and electronic warfare,” pro-state analyst Ali Samadzadeh said on the programme on Saturday.

“There was no movement in Tehran to tie Beijing and Moscow to the war, and this major flaw exists in the form of the negotiations and the text of the MoU as well,” he said.

More than 60 hardline legislators on Sunday postponed plans to protest against the closure of parliament since the start of the war after its presiding board said it would meet to reconvene the assembly, following Ali Khamenei’s burial next month.

Many others say demands for extracting major concessions from the US and Israel do not correspond with the reality of the situation after months of war.

“In terms of military power, we couldn’t do anything about the US blockade and we didn’t think the crisis would get so serious,” pro-state commentator Vahid Ashtari told crowds at a street event in Tehran.

“I think a type of blind idealism has emerged that believes we are on top and at the peak, so we shouldn’t make a deal. But there are facts on the ground. We have some missiles and drones to carry out an asymmetric defence, but we have no fighter jets to fly to the US and hit Trump. Not only could we not avenge [Khamenei], we could not avenge Haj Qassem either,” he added, in reference to General Qassem Soleimani, who was assassinated by the US in 2020.

After two nights of attacks, Iran’s financial markets also reacted poorly, with the national currency losing gains since the signing of the MoU to trade at about 1.7 million rials against the dollar in Tehran’s open market on Sunday.

The main index of the Tehran Stock Exchange also lost more than 100,000 points to stand at just over five million points at the end of trading on Sunday, the second day of the working week in Iran.

Vahid, a 37-year-old mechanic who also deals in car parts in Tehran’s Grand Bazaar, told Al Jazeera that while the market has marginally improved since the signing of the deal with the US, it is still treading on thin ice.

He said parts for foreign cars are becoming harder to find, while prices have been rising rapidly for both domestic and foreign vehicle parts.

“I think the war will start again over the coming months and some in the bazaar think the same,” he said.

Bahrain and Kuwait have condemned Iran’s retaliatory attacks after a second day of US strikes on Iran. Tehran University academic Hassan Ahmadian argues the US is trying to find its way out of the Memorandum of Understanding that Trump signed 10 days ago, ending the war.

Iran has said it remains committed to implementing the MoU signed with the United States. However, Tehran warned that it would take reciprocal measures if Washington fails to honour its obligations under the agreement.

Pakistan’s Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif has signed a US-Iran memorandum of understanding aimed at ending the war between the two countries. US President Donald Trump and Iran’s President Masoud Pezeshkian signed on Wednesday.

Iran’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs spokesperson, Esmaeil Baghaei, has announced that a memorandum of understanding with the United States has been finalised and signed electronically by both sides.

He added that the agreement has already gone into effect.

“The text of the Islamabad Memorandum of Understanding was finalised with the signatures of the presidents,” Baghaei told the news agency IRNA. “Now it is time to test the implementation of the agreement.”

Wednesday’s statement appears to confirm that the US and Iran have agreed to suspend military operations, paving the way for further negotiations.

Given that both sides signed the agreement electronically, Baghaei noted that there would be no signing ceremony on Friday in Geneva, Switzerland, as had previously been expected.

Negotiating teams, however, still plan to be in the Swiss city. A decision on a possible in-person meeting between them is expected in the coming hours, though for now such plans are paused, according to Baghaei.

While the office of US President Donald Trump has yet to issue a formal statement on the signing, Al Jazeera correspondent Mike Hanna explained that a White House spokesperson confirmed earlier in the day that it happened.

But Hanna warned that the memorandum is likely to face domestic backlash in the US, where Trump had been under right-wing pressure to take a hard line against Iran.

“There’s a great deal of dissatisfaction with the memorandum of understanding, as it has been outlined to the public at this particular point, even among some Republicans who have expressed the concern that Iran is being treated leniently,” Hanna said.

He also emphasised the administration’s position that the memorandum is not a full-fledged deal but rather a prelude to more negotiations.

“The administration is fighting hard to persuade the American public and American politicians that this is not a defeat for the United States,” Hanna said.

Since February 28, the US and Israel have been jointly engaged in a war against Iran, though a temporary ceasefire suspended much of the most intense fighting on April 8.

Trump has repeatedly said his goal in launching the war was to prevent Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon.

Since the memorandum was revealed, he has highlighted the document’s assurances that Iran will not seek a nuclear weapon, though Tehran has long denied any intention of doing so.

But according to a US account, the memo goes beyond the question of nuclear weapons. It sets up a 60-day timeline for a final deal to be struck, and it indicates that the US will rally “regional partners” to create a $300bn for Iran’s reconstruction.

US sanctions would also work towards lifting its sanctions against Iran, and the country would issue waivers for the export of Iranian fuel.

Iran has touted those terms as a victory. On Wednesday, chief negotiator Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf told Fars, an Iranian state news agency, that the US had failed to achieve its goals with Iran and pointed to the memo as proof.

“The agreement is a record of US failure,” Ghalibaf said. “People will see it and judge.”

He also explained that the Strait of Hormuz would not return to “pre-war conditions” after the 60-day period for negotiations stipulated in the agreement. He suggested that Iran will expect payments for use of the waterway.

“I emphasise again that the Strait of Hormuz will never return to the previous conditions,” Ghalibaf said.

“Iran has the right to sovereignty over the Strait of Hormuz, and of course, we will receive a fee for services.”

That position is likely to put pressure on the Trump administration, which had pledged that the strait, a key waterway for trade, would be “permanently toll-free”.

Since the start of the war, Iran has blocked the waterway, sending global prices for fuel, fertiliser and other goods soaring.

The US had responded with its own blockade of Iranian ports, though that effort is slated to end under the memorandum.

Both sides, however, have emphasised that the memorandum of understanding is not a final agreement on all issues of dispute. More negotiations are expected to resolve lasting impasses.

“It will only become a deal, as such, at the end of the 60-day negotiation period. At least, that’s the intention,” Hanna reported.

US and Iranian negotiators have reached a memorandum of understanding on a proposed 60-day ceasefire extension, according to US sources, but the deal still requires President Donald Trump’s approval.