On the day before the formal signing of the memorandum between the U.S. and Iran, both sides were already performing their own scripts. A source within Iran’s negotiating team stated that the 14-point memorandum disclosed by Bloomberg was "inaccurate and riddled with flaws," particularly the first point and the section concerning the Strait of Hormuz, which were "obviously inaccurate" and omitted key wording.

More direct were informed diplomats, who explicitly said the Bloomberg version was actually a draft from May, not the official text signed over the weekend.

The real bombshell lies in the Strait of Hormuz. The Bloomberg version didn’t mention the words "Strait of Hormuz" at all, instead vaguely stating only "shipping restored within 30 days." Yet Iranian Parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagheri Kalbaf clearly declared on the 18th: "The strait will never return to its pre-war state; Iran will charge service fees." Meanwhile, Trump firmly insisted on "permanent free passage." The two sides can't even agree on basic facts.

And the bilingual version itself is evidence of mutual distrust.

Bagheri emphasized on the 18th that the Persian and English versions of the memorandum carry equal legal force—because "only the English version could potentially suffer from subjective translation bias." When one country insists on a dual-language lock, what does it imply? It means neither side trusts the other not to change the wording afterward.

On the 19th, during the Swiss signing ceremony, Trump and Kalbaf signed remotely, officially bringing the text into effect. But every single item in the 14 points—the handling of enriched uranium, exclusion of missiles, disbursement schedule for the $30 billion fund, and control over fees at the Strait of Hormuz—contains discrepancies between the two versions. The rejection of the Bloomberg leak proves exactly that each side is promoting its own favorable narrative.

Thus, the 60-day technical negotiations are the real battlefield; the signing ceremony is merely a photo op. The memorandum was inherently a political statement without binding force—Trump can walk away at any time. Iran has clearly learned its lesson this time.

Original article: toutiao.com/article/1868295938828423/

Disclaimer: This article represents the personal views of the author.