US - Iran Peace agreement Part 2

[JadeHare]

Doesn’t really look like anyone believes that Donald is going to come out of his stupid war with any kind of better deal.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/us/news/2026/05/26/trump-us-iran-capitulation/

@JadeHare

On your post above re Trump and US oil prices, I have been following that a bit, and what struck me is that is his lack of awareness that petrol prices today depend on how much the crude cost when the refiners bought the oil. Not on what crude costs today.

This is the guy doing a peace deal.

It doesn't really matter if Iranian senior negotiators meet directly with US senior negotiators or if they do it through intermediaries.

Both sides know by now that they will have to make significant concessions to get part of what they want, so anything else they say is just rhetoric to appeal to their supporters.

If they can't achieve a deal within the 60 days the options are extending the time frame or a return to war. I'm guessing they will extend the time frame if they need to, as neither side really benefits from a return to war.

Iranian hard-liners will have to accept some of the major US demands such as eliminating their stockpile of highly enriched uranium, whatever they say. And likewise the US will have to agree to some of the Iran demands such as unfreezing funds and assets of Iran upon the implementation of the MOU.

Lets remember article 13 of the MOU.

13. After signing this MoU and subject to the beginning of the implementation of Paragraphs 1, 4, 5, 10 and 11 of this MoU and the continuing implementation of these measures, the United States of America and the Islamic Republic of Iran will start negotiations regarding the final deal exclusively on the other paragraphs.

The nuke stuff is article 8. That comes after the stuff in 13.

And amidst it all, Iran controls the Strait

The Memorandum of Understanding has now been signed and subject to 1,4, 5,10 and 11 being implemented, talks should soon be starting on the other points.

Points 1 is the immediate and permanent termination of military operations on all fronts, including in Lebanon. The Lebanon part hasn't happened but the MoU talks seem to be going ahead anyway, via intermediaries so the hardliners can say they aren't directly talking to the US.

Points 4 & 5 relate to the SoH - hopefully both sides will be able to reach agreement on this so talks can move onto other areas.

Points 10 & 11 relate to the U.S. Department of Treasury issuing waivers for the export of Iranian crude oil for the 60 days which I believe they have done, and also the unfreezing of funds and assets while the MoU progresses.

Whether it takes 60 days or longer, all the points will need to be agreed before a final deal can be signed by both parties. This includes points 7&8:

Point 8: The Islamic Republic of Iran reaffirms that it shall not procure or develop nuclear weapons. The United States of America and the Islamic Republic of Iran have agreed to resolve the disposition of stockpiled enriched material, pursuant to a mechanism that will be mutually agreed upon in accordance with the schedule mentioned in paragraph seven, with the minimum methodology to be down. Blending on site under the supervision of the IAEA. The two parties also agreed to discuss the issue of enrichment and other mutually agreed matters related to the Islamic Republic of Iran's nuclear needs, based on a satisfactory framework being agreed upon in the final deal.

Point 7: The United States of America undertakes to terminate all types of sanctions against the Islamic Republic of Iran, including the United Nations Security Council resolutions, i.e. International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) Board of Governors resolutions and all unilateral U.S. sanctions, primary and secondary, in an agreed upon schedule. As part of the final deal, the Islamic Republic of Iran and the United States of America acknowledge the critical importance of the sanctions termination issue above mentioned, and express their intentions to immediately address these issues in the negotiations in order to achieve mutual agreement on them.

Note that the US terminating sanctions (point 7) is linked to Iran disposing of stockpiled enriched material (point 8).

"Special Envoy Witkoff and Jared Kushner will be flying to Doha for high-level meetings this week, as we continue to discuss the memorandum of understanding," Leavitt said in an interview with Fox News on Monday.

These talks are scheduled to start today

Yes. And my prediction is that once the ships are running smooth, Trump will walk away from the whole thing as if it never happened. He will just claim Iran has signed a nuke deal, Truth does not matter to him. It's not even optionable to him. It's something to avoid.

Here is what he posted on June 24th

Iran has informed the U.S. that, despite troublemaking Fake News reporting to the contrary, there are "NO TOLLS, NO INSURANCE COSTS, & NO OTHER CHARGES OF ANY KIND BEING SOUGHT OR RECEIVED BY IRAN ON SHIPS TRAVELING THE STRAIT OF HORMUZ." If this is false information, negotiations would end, immediately! Additionally, no money has been given to Iran, or released from their money to them, by the U.S. We will be releasing some of their money, that is totally controlled by us, to our Farmers and Ranchers, for the purchase of Corn, Wheat, Soybeans, and more. Food is desperately needed in Iran, and we will be purchasing it for them exclusively from the United States. Thank you for your attention to this matter! President DONALD J. TRUMP
Source: Truth Social

So he was going back on the funds then. And even mid post, he changes from them buying US produce, to the US buying it and giving it to Iran.

On June 29th though, he declared a state of emergency because :

"Currently, United States production of phosphate fertilizer is insufficient to support domestic agricultural food production after accounting for exports. "

Declaration of Emergency and Authorization for Temporary Duty Free Importation of Phosphate Fertilizer Morocco – The White House

And there is a shortage of fertilizer in the US because :

"Global supply chains for phosphate fertilizer and fertilizer inputs, including imports of such products into the United States, have been disrupted in recent months by, among other things, conflicts in fertilizer-producing regions as well as trade actions taken by major fertilizer-producing countries. "

Once those ships are running, he will walk away. Iran have him over the proverbial barrel.

And that is without mentioning world oil reserves being almost depleted.

Dream on @RedTagAlan "Iran have him over the proverbial barrel".

If Iran had the US over a barrel they wouldn't have had to agree to dilute their enriched uranium. At the beginning of negotiations they were demanding recognition of Iran’s right to nuclear enrichment.

That's how negotiations work.

Yes of course and shows that both sides need to negotiate because no one side has the other one over the barrel.

This from CNN is the last half hour.

"Iran-Qatar talks on Wednesday will cover the implementation of Tehran’s agreement with the US, as well as its frozen assets, Iranian Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Esmaeil Baghaei said on Tuesday.
“What will probably take place in Doha tomorrow is a discussion with the Qatari side on the implementation of some provisions of the memorandum of understanding, including the provision concerning the release of Iran’s restricted assets,” Baghaei said on Tuesday.
He added that Iran’s negotiating team had no plan to meet with the American delegation in the coming days.
Qatar’s Foreign Ministry spokesman Majed al-Ansari said Tuesday that US envoy Steve Witkoff and President Donald Trump’s son-in-law Jared Kushner have arrived in Doha to meet Qatari mediators, but stressed there will not be a meeting with Iranian officials.
He added that $6 billion of Iran’s frozen funds have not been transferred to Tehran, but that this would happen “according to the advancement of negotiations.”

They want their money. That is article 11 of the MOU, and article 11 is part of article 13.

Trump signed the MOU, and he has to deliver article 13 before the nuke stuff even starts. He can spin it however he wants to his MAGA base, but the deal was for the funds to be released. Not for Trump to spin it on his social media.

If he does not stick to his own MOU, what collapses first ? Iran who has been under sanctions for decades, or the rest of the world who are not really prepared at all for the SoH being closed.

Whilst I agree that no one side has the other one over the barrel, Iran has a trump card in the Strait of Hormuz

Iran want the money but they won't get money for nothing, beyond terminating some sanctions/unfreezing some funds while the talks are seen to be progressing.

They do have the SoH but Tehran does not have sole decision-making powers in the strait’s future management. There is Oman too.

From the Guardian:

The very fact that Iran’s deputy foreign minister, Kazem Gharibabadi, held joint discussions in Muscat with Oman’s minister of state for foreign affairs, Abdulaziz al-Hinai, is a tacit acknowledgment by Tehran that it does not have sole decision-making powers in the strait’s future management.

What Oman has tried to do is construct a management system that will ensure littoral states receive income from commercial shipping passing through the strait but the income would come as much as possible in the voluntary contributions, or payments for specific navigational services made by trade groups, ships or states.

The Omani foreign minister, Badr al-Busaidi, explained: “We are not in favour of imposing tolls on passage through the strait of Hormuz, which is prohibited internationally – whereas service fees are legal, and discussions are currently under way with the Iranian side concerning them.” It is a distinction with a difference, and one that has been developed with some of the best UK commercial legal advice.

Article 26 of the law of the sea expressly forbids payment for mere passage but article 43 permits user states and strait states to fund cooperatively the provision of maritime services, including a port call or service used.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2026/jun/29/oman-safe-reopening-strait-hormuz-iran-us-middle-east

Re service fees for transit. I saw a Sky news article and while what was written was limited and the video would not play in my region, there does appear to be precedent on UNCLOS article 26.

Article 26

Charges which may be levied upon foreign ships

1. No charge may be levied upon foreign ships by reason only of their passage through the territorial sea.

2. Charges may be levied upon a foreign ship passing through the territorial sea as payment only for specific services rendered to the ship. These charges shall be levied without discrimination.

The precedent, so far as I can work out, is that section 2 applies to ships that request a service. So it looks like I have been wrong on that. Seems they can't say all ships need a specific service, but they can offer it, and charge these who need or ask for it.

But UNCLOS is a sensitive subject where I am, so I can't find what the precedent is.

So if someone with a full internet could look that up, I reckon that would be great info for the board.

They can charge all for help Iran /Oman perceive necessary
ie co ordinating their passage for example

Does this help

Permitted Charges and Fees under UNCLOS 1]

Specific Services Rendered: A state can charge fees for concrete services provided to a vessel. This includes pilotage fees (paying for a local navigator to guide a ship through complex waterways), towage (tugboat assistance), and port entry fees. 1]

Administrative and Enforcement Costs: A state may impose fees or fines on foreign vessels if they violate international marine environmental regulations (such as greenhouse gas or sulphur emission limits) and are required to cover the costs of investigation or port detention. 1, 2, 3]

Reimbursement for Specific Assistance: Charges can be levied to cover the direct costs of rendering emergency assistance, salvage operations, or responding to maritime accidents.
Examples of Valid and Invalid Charging

Invalid (The act of simple passage): A foreign cargo ship sailing through the Strait of Hormuz or the Strait of Malacca cannot be charged a toll or "right of passage" fee. 1, 2]

Valid (Port or pilotage fees): If a ship diverting through territorial waters decides to drop anchor in a harbor, the coastal state can legally charge anchorage fees or compulsory port fees.

Valid (Environmental/Safety Levies): If a ship requires the active assistance of a coastal state's coast guard for emergency ice-breaking or navigating a tricky, shallow river channel, that state may charge service fees to cover the operational cost of providing that specific help.

Note: For man-made, artificial waterways like the Suez Canal or the Panama Canal, these are entirely man-made and fall outside the jurisdiction of UNCLOS. Such canals are governed by private/national sovereignty and treaties allowing them to freely charge tolls. 1, 2, 3]

Thanks @DrPrunesqualer

As you say, Iran has the trump card at present. They can also potentially shut down passage in other sea routes. Trump, at least, does understand the potential economic implications of this. The US administration have been working around the clock to manipulate the markets and especially to manipulate the oil price down. However, that can only work so long if the SOH remains closed or with massively reduced oil+ exports.
As I said before, I think the chance of a rapid, successful, lasting agreement is very low. I think there is a good chance of a major re-ignition of hostilities, although perhaps not very rapidly (mid terms coming up). Imo, there is also a higher chance that Iran will try to develop nuclear weapons post war than pre war, when they were not doing so. I could be completely wrong, of course, but these things seem more likely than not.

If you think that Iran had no nuclear ambitions pre war then can you explain why they had enriched uranium to beyond the grade necessary for domestic use?
(preferably without meaningless statements like because they could).

US special envoy Steve Witkoff and President Donald Trump's son-in-law Jared Kushner are in Doha to discuss the US-Iran negotiations with mediators, Qatar's foreign ministry spokesman says, but they will not meet Iranian officials there.

Majed al-Ansari told reporters that no high-level meetings or direct talks between the two sides were scheduled in the coming days.

(BBC)

https://bsky.app/profile/onestpress.onestnetwork.com/post/3mpleyhbcmk2k

🧵 1/3 Obama explaining the situation with Iran

“There was a deal in place in which Iran had agreed not to develop nuclear weapons that the entire international community, including Israeli intelligence, our own intelligence agencies, assessed was working.

2/3 …This administration, or a prior version of this administration, pulled out of it, which caused then Iran to develop more nuclear capacity.

We've now fought a war, spent billions and billions of dollars, put enormous strain on our military. A lot of people have died.

3/3 ..And it feels like we're back where we were before we started the war—except maybe a little bit worse off.

And my understanding is that the ceasefire says we've now got 60 days to develop a plan to deal with the nuclear issue, but we don't know yet what that plan is.”

Here is what appears to be a bit of bad reporting on the CNN feed just now-

"Iran says progress in US talks depends on five key demands. Here’s what they are

By Sarah Tamimi

Iran’s chief negotiator Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf has conditioned the implementation of the Iran-US agreement upon the fulfillment of 5 provisions laid out in the pact.

In his interview with Iran’s state broadcaster on Tuesday, Ghalibaf highlighted Articles 1, 4, 5, 10 and 11 as prerequisites.

Here’s what the articles are and how implementation has progressed:"

The piece then goes on to say what these article are.

The thing is, those articles listed as needing to be done first, is what article 13 of the MOU says. But the CNN piece does not say that at all.

So the article might give the impression that Iran are changing from the MOU. But what Iran are saying is to follow the MOU.

Naughty CNN.

As the Pentagon stays quiet, AP reconstructs a US strike that killed over 100 Iranian children

https://apnews.com/article/iran-school-strike-baluch-trump-2a134a5c74d80db763db4c3eb6d0d847

One US airman missing after a helicopter ditched in the Arabian Sea, CENTCOM announces. Three rescued.

“There is no indication the emergency was caused by hostile action.”