US - Iran Peace agreement Part 3

[TopPocketFind]

https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/conflict-in-the-middle-east/5535141-us-iran-peace-agreement-part-2https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/conflict-in-the-middle-east/5535141-us-iran-peace-agreement-part-2

More evidence of the struggle in Tehran between (relative) moderates who support diplomacy with the US and extremist hardliners who don't:

Friday prayers across Iran became a synchronized campaign for revenge on Friday, with clerics rejecting further negotiations with Washington, defending Tehran’s control of the Strait of Hormuz and demanding visible retaliation for the killing of Ali Khamenei.

The message had been set in advance by the Friday Prayer Policy Council, which announced that weekly services nationwide would become “Fridays of Blood Vengeance and Revenge” until those blamed for Khamenei’s killing were punished.

www.iranintl.com/en/202607106158

Zineb Riboua on twitter is an excellent analyst, theres times when I thought she was deluded and then she turned out to be right. Modern day cassandra. She thought the MOU was simply a mechanism by which the americans were stabilising energy markets, think she may have been right.

“Fridays of Blood Vengeance and Revenge”

And what ... Mondays of peace and calmly going about your day.

I googled her and read her interesting article from January 2026, The Seven Strategic Failures That Will End Khamenei’s Rule.

Modern day Cassandra indeed when the said of the Khamenei I do not believe he will remain in power for long. It is a bold prediction—but all indicators are flashing red.

The reasons she gives for her prediction are Water Management Incompetence, Taking the Proxies for Granted, Misreading Israel's Military Achievements, Misreading President Trump and American Resolve, Betting on China, Alienating the Next Generation and Overestimating the Coercive State.

I don't really use twitter but will take a look at her account; she writes well.

https://www.hudson.org/corruption/seven-strategic-failures-will-end-khameneis-rule-zineb-ribuoa

Ummm, my previous post was deleted. Yet had positive reactions.

But back to the MOU, which appears to be confusing even news reporters. I agree with @Bringemout's post. That hurried MOU was for Trump's domestic audience in advance of the 250 anniversary celebrations. Bringing oil price down was essential to that.

Zineb Riboua on X:

Riboua: I don’t think the IRGC is meaningfully divided into “hardliners” and “pragmatists.” The more relevant divide is between those who want to get paid and have cash now and those willing to wait. That is the real fault line. It also helps explain the persistent push to weaponize the Strait of Hormuz as they see immediate escalation as the fastest path to extracting economic concessions (frozen funds). So far, it’s not working for them and the MOU negotiations of 60 days which can be extended to another 60 days with 0 guarantees of a final deal don’t work in their favor.

Response: the frozen assets, at least partially, were supposed to be released under the MOU, so I’m sure I entirely understand what you’re saying here…?

Riboua: The MOU had a big if for the release and US can use any pretext for the if to stand or to be delayed

The Independent:

“The US has hit Iranian targets in the strait; Iran has targeted US bases in Jordan, Bahrain and Kuwait.
At the same time, Trump has again claimed – for possibly the squillionth time – that Iran is desperate to make a deal. On this, the US president is probably right: of course the Iranians want to make a deal. Who wouldn’t?”

“The problem is that America is more desperate. The spike in oil prices that has followed the US and Israel’s war in Iran is damaging the global economy, and more particularly, for Trump, the US economy. And that gives the Iranians leverage.
The Strait of Hormuz, which was operating freely before 28 February when the US and Israel launched their ill-fated mission to overthrow the regime in Tehran, is now firmly under the control of the mullahs. Who needs a nuke when your boot is on the windpipe of the global economy?”

“The fact is that while the US-led strikes have killed a swathe of Iran’s leadership and diminished the nation’s armed forces, they haven’t been destroyed. So the situation that Trump is failing to grapple with is that while the Iranians – sure – have been weakened, they have also been emboldened.
Let’s make no bones about it: the Iranian regime is a ghastly, repressive, brutal autocracy. It killed, it has been reported, around 30,000 of its own people without batting an eyelid when they dared to protest and demand political freedom. So if Trump thinks a little extra US bombing is going to make these theocratic despots bend the knee, he is sadly mistaken. They have seen the power they have over that vital shipping lane.
They also know that for Trump to force the reopening of the strait would require US forces on the ground in huge numbers. And they’re smart enough to know that that is not going to happen, because of American public opinion, which tilts between ambivalence and downright hostility towards this war of choice. ”

“The US president has got himself stuck between the proverbial rock and a hard place. Calling the Iranians scum might make him feel better, but what is it doing to help resolve the situation? Surely the Iranians are more convinced than ever that they have him where they want him: flailing around.”

“All of this was unfolding at the Nato summit in Ankara, where the Western security umbrella looked as threadbare as ever. Trump told the Italians that there ought to be a restraining order on his one-time ally, the Italian prime minister Giorgia Meloni; he attacked Keir Starmer (again) for failing to support the war in Iran; he told the Danes he still wanted to annex Greenland; and he threatened the Spaniards with a total trade ban. Disunited we stand.
When measured against the most dire predictions for this summit, perhaps it can be hailed as a success, but that is only because the bar has been so lowered.
Although the European nations got a tongue-lashing from the US president for their reluctance to support his Iranian war effort, how many of them, when they look at the mess the Americans are in, think they got that call wrong?”

The president has notched up one significant victory on the international stage over the past 10 days – and that was getting Folarin Balogan’s red card overturned by Fifa ahead of the US game against Belgium.

“If only there were a Gianni Infantino in charge of the world, whom Trump could push around. At the England/Mexico game last weekend in the Azteca, it was the most intimidating atmosphere. The noise inside the stadium was like nothing I had ever heard. But all rivalries were put aside when a picture of Infantino was put up on the screens. All the fans booed as one.
For all America’s might, power and bullying of Infantino, the US men’s football team foundered against the stubborn resistance of a determined Belgian side. It’s not hard to see a similar picture being played out in the Middle East. ”

Excerpt From
“Voices: Trump’s right that Iran wants a deal – but he is far more desperate for one”
Jon Sopel
The Independent
https://apple.news/AVjLt5kItQACS-eCQ-VxYMA
This material may be protected by copyright.

Extracted from one of the latest Truths

"the U.S. Military is ready, willing, and able, for a one year period of time, subject to extension, to completely decimate and destroy all areas of Iran - PRAISE BE TO ALLAH! President DONALD J. TRUMP"

In view of this existential threat from a clearly deranged but powerful POTUS, who would blame Iran for wanting nuclear capablility too. This was what kept war from breaking out during the Cold War period. A stand off, because of the risk of mutual destruction.

Is Trump a convert to Islam now?

Who could blame Iran for wanting nuclear capability?

It may be understandable why they might want them but there's a long list of countries saying Iran must never be allowed to develop a nuclear weapon.

There's NATO, the European Union, leaders of the G7 so that's Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the UK and the US. Israel of course and then there's Australia ...I'm sure I've missed a few out but you get the gist.

Once again that brings us back to why the JCPOA was negotiated.

He has re-TRUTHED it. So that is twice he posted that, an hour apart.

And yes, a country wanting nukes is often a country threatened by nukes. So he has just given them a reason to want nukes now. Iran wants to join the MAD club. It has worked for the DPRK, and Pakistan. And India too.

The JCPOA was designed to ensure that Iran’s nuclear program would be exclusively peaceful and provided for the lifting of nuclear-related sanctions in order to prevent Iran from developing nuclear weapons.
"It blocks every possible pathway Iran could use to build a nuclear bomb while ensuring through a comprehensive, intrusive, and unprecedented verification and transparency regime, that Iran’s nuclear program remains exclusively peaceful moving forward," Obama's White House said at the time.
(ABC news)

It took two years to negotiate and had been working as Iran had been complying with inspections as per the conditions. The question now is why Trump chose to withdraw the US from it. A reason apart from an obvious and irrational fixation on undoing things arranged during the Obama (and Biden) administration.

@RedTagAlan I seem to have read somewhere that Iran is now rebuilding its nuclear facilities. In popular parlance, 'only a fool brings a knife to a gun fight' adage might apply.

It was CNN. They say satellite photos show work going on.

That just reminded me that Israel is supposed to have a nuclear weapon the existence of which they have refused to comment on.

eta
So Iran following the Israeli playbook?

What makes you think there has to be a reason apart from an obvious and irrational fixation on undoing things arranged during the Obama (and Biden) administration? You're always saying how irrational he is.

Oh sorry @RedTagAlan is always saying how irrational Trump is, but I expect you agree @trumpredcard .

That will be the US target next time the IRGC strike a ship or do anything else the US don't like no doubt.

So badly worded. Which is what I said on page 2. Wall Street Journal:

“The root of the dispute is Paragraph 5, which says Iran will make arrangements to restore shipping through the strategic waterway and then work with Oman to determine how to administer it in the future. But it also includes an Iranian pledge to ensure safe passage and remove military obstacles such as mines.
Trump administration officials saw that clause as unlocking the strait, the main accomplishment of the president’s deal. Iranian hard-liners, however, have used it to push a maximalist interpretation that gives the Islamic Republic exclusive control over the waterway as a key source of leverage.
The U.S. and its Arab Gulf allies don’t want Iranian hegemony over Hormuz, the lifeline for much of the world’s oil and gas supply. The language of the deal has left the two sides fighting over that point rather than making progress on a final agreement on Tehran’s nuclear program. ”

““This gap in interpretation is wide, baked into the deal, and not exactly surprising,” said Michael Horowitz, an Israeli geopolitical analyst. “Washington has tried to convince Tehran that compliance would be more profitable, but this framing misses the point. Iran’s behavior isn’t driven by financial motives but by security concerns and bargaining leverage. It’s a power dynamic.”
Three weeks after Trump signed the preliminary deal to wind down the war at Versailles, France, traffic through the Strait of Hormuz is still stunted. Crossings fell to 25 on Wednesday amid the U.S. and Iranian exchanges of fire, from 49 the day before, according to ship-tracking company Kpler. More than 100 ships crossed each day before the war.”

“A U.S. official familiar with negotiations said Paragraph 5 has been problematic and that the U.S. and Iran are on “different planets” when it comes to interpreting the deal. Notably, the paragraph says nothing about the U.S. making arrangements for the safe passage of vessels, which Iran has seized on to attack ships that use a U.S.-coordinated route, the official said.
“President Trump made his feelings very clear yesterday in no uncertain terms. Iran’s attacks on these innocent vessels are acts of terrorism, a separate U.S. official said. “The United States is still committed to finding a resolution, and technical talks continue. Iran can never possess a nuclear weapon.”
Iran’s lead negotiator in the talks with the U.S., parliament speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, quoted the clause in arguing on social media that Iran controls the strait.
“The Strait of Hormuz will only open with ‘Iranian arrangements,’ not American threats,” he said.”

Excerpt From
“The Fight Over Hormuz Boils Down to One Poorly Worded Clause in Trump’s Deal”
Benoit Faucon, Laurence Norman, Rebecca Feng, Shelby Holliday
The Wall Street Journal
https://apple.news/AW1X6-zWCQ9KTaBDMZnGOdQ
This material may be protected by copyright.

@JadeHare

Quote " “A U.S. official familiar with negotiations said Paragraph 5 has been problematic and that the U.S. and Iran are on “different planets” when it comes to interpreting the deal."

I feel like that when I read the US 2nd amendment, and how the pro gun folk interpret it.

When it comes to the MOU though, maybe I am a bit conditioned to how authoritarian states interpret such things, because when I read it it instantly looks to me like Iran are to run it in the time period. You should see how the PRC manages to interpret UNCLOS.

I also saw a thing today that Indonesia were considering transit fees for the Strait of Malacca. But they recently dropped the idea. I can't get much info on that, but it would be interesting to see how they proposed doing that.

Where's Mojtaba, the man CNN called 'the most consequential – leader in the Islamic Republic’s 47-year history?

Israeli Defense Minister Israel Katz's said that he's “marked for death”, so I think that the Israelis are now playing the same game as non-Magats re Trump.
Namely, Is he dead yet? Every morning at 12:01hrs. The irony.

To Iranian authorities' thinking, not being seen in public isn't necessarily detrimental. At his father's funeral, there was huge support amongst the mourners, for their new Supreme Leader. Plus the idea of a Khamenei ruling from the shadows serves to protect his authority, continues the concept of Velayet e-Faqih by him whilst allowing decisions, allegedly in his name, to be made.

This means that any disagreements behind the scenes can be controlled and presented to Iranians in a positive way, while non/peace negotiations stall/continue.
Whichever side comes out on top in this war will be the one determining what the MOU means.

My take is that it was a lazily complied document that needs to be torn up while lawyers and experienced negotiators clarify the issues. Not a Trump family grifter, a real estate investor who calls the people of Gaza are Nazis, and a WH intern, or two.

I also saw a thing today that Indonesia were considering transit fees for the Strait of Malacca.

I believe that several countries with straits used by commercial vessels are watching closely what happens with Hormuz. Depending on the outcome, the implications for increased transportation costs will have a global economic impact.

It's mentioned in this article

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2026/jul/11/europe-considers-proposals-navigational-fees-strait-of-hormuz-iran-us

Europe is studying proposals that may allow the charging of navigational fees in the strait of Hormuz so long as the tolls are not compulsory and have the support of the UN agency that regulates maritime transport.

Britain’s deputy prime minister, David Lammy, said the imposition of compulsory tolls would be disastrous. But some of his cabinet colleagues said they recognised that systems of payments for specific navigational services were permissible in many natural waterways, including the strait of Malacca and the Channel.

This is something we all seem to agree on, that paragraph 5 is badly worded and open to interpretation.

Will the IRGC apologise by the end of today for their “mistake” in hitting 3 commercial ships as the US have demanded? Seems unlikely but I hope so in the interests of peace.

Re these satellite images, the Times of Israel observe that Iran may have violated the MoU they signed last month, in which they committed to maintaining the status quo in its nuclear programme.