Is a major conclusion finally in sight for U.S.-Iran? On the 11th, Trump enthusiastically announced that Iran's Supreme Leader has agreed, all parties have approved the U.S.-Iran Memorandum of Understanding, and it may be signed in Europe this weekend—after which the Strait of Hormuz would immediately reopen, and no attack on Khark Island would take place.
But this deal is highly unlikely to materialize. The reason is simple: Trump needs the narrative of "I've tamed Iran" to secure a diplomatic victory, so he overstates his claims to pressure Iran into submission. However, Iran’s own sources have just made clear—no talks without unfreezing $24 billion in frozen assets.
Moreover, Iran’s Foreign Ministry spokesperson stated that no final conclusions have been reached so far, and external reports are merely speculation. According to Fars News Agency citing informed insiders, Iran hasn’t even reviewed the text yet—Trump’s statements are therefore untrue. Furthermore, the U.S. keeps shifting its position; this contradictory stance itself is the biggest obstacle. Iran will not compromise on red-line issues.
Moreover, how to handle enriched uranium, whether nuclear facilities will be dismantled, and whether IAEA inspectors can conduct surprise visits—each of these is a deadlocked issue. There’s a chasm between “the memorandum is nearly finalized” and “all parties have approved”—a gap spanning tens of thousands of miles.
Let’s not forget, just hours earlier, Trump was threatening to launch a fierce strike on Iran “that very night.” An agreement extracted under such a gun-to-the-head situation is something Tehran could never truly accept.
Thus, Trump is merely selling expectations, while Iran is undermining the process. In reality, both sides haven’t even begun to agree. This so-called “Memorandum of Understanding” is likely to end up like the JCPOA that was torn up years ago—either it’s signed but unenforceable, or it never gets signed at all.
Original: toutiao.com/article/1867752666756108/
Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are solely those of the author.