JUNE 14, coincidentally US President Donald Trump’s birthday, marked the announcement of the US-Iran peace deal. Trump posted on social media about the reopening of the Strait of Hormuz and the lifting of the US blockade. Pakistani Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif announced that the deal-signing ceremony would be held in Switzerland on June 19. Interestingly, Sharif thanked Qatar, Saudi Arabia and Türkiye, omitting the UAE. He said mediators would facilitate “pre-implementation discussions”, which would lay the foundation for the “technical talks”.
Iran, on the other hand, published the 14-clause Memorandum of Understanding (MOU). The clauses include $300 billion in reconstruction commitments from the US and allies; unfreezing of $24-billion funds, half before negotiations; lifting of the blockade within 30 days and the withdrawal of US forces from around Iran. The reopening of Hormuz is under Iranian purview; its management stays with Iran. Clause 9 notes the Iranian commitment to not produce nuclear weapons, without mentioning any cap on enrichment. Under Clause 14, the missile programme and support for proxy groups stand removed from the agenda.
Iranian Deputy Foreign Minister Kazem Gharibabadi called it a “total victory”. The Iranian security council claimed that the deal included an immediate end to fighting in Lebanon. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu disagreed with this assertion. The bulk of Iranian claims would be subject to negotiations after the MoU is signed.
Will the world now transition towards pre-2025 normalcy? Global disruption began with the tariffs unleashed by Trump on April 2 last year, christened “Liberation Day”. Repeatedly, the US threatened to annex Canada and Greenland, using force, if necessary. In June 2025 came the joint attack by the US and Israel on Iran, a 12-day war and the claim that the Iranian nuclear programme stood dismantled.
On February 28, 2026, there was a second and more serious military onslaught on Iran, starting with the assassination of the Iranian Supreme Leader, Ali Khamenei. It was based on the simplistic assumption — which also formed the basis of Russian President Vladimir Putin’s attack on Ukraine in February 2022 — that a popular uprising and instant regime change would occur. Perhaps the US success in rapidly replacing Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro in January 2026 encouraged it to attack Iran.
It is generally accepted that Trump has unravelled the post-1945 rules-based order. He has replaced traditional multilateralism with brazen unilateralism, besides adopting unilateral trade policies and arbitrary tariffs. Multilateral institutions stand eroded, exemplified by the US withdrawal from the World Health Organisation. The US has even targeted fellow NATO members, starting with Canada and then Denmark, which controls Greenland.
However, the Iranians resiliently handled the blitz of airstrikes. The attackers also miscalculated Iranian preparedness. After the June 2025 onslaught, Iran modified its defence strategy by embedding drones and missiles in tunnels deep inside mountains. Iran has two massive mountain ranges and thus unlimited space for its new strategy. Thus, a war supposed to end quickly, seeking regime change and destruction of Iran’s nuclear programme, turned into a stalemate.
The US had to declare a ceasefire on April 8 as Iran continued to retaliate, targeting US military facilities in the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) countries and Iraq, besides penetrating Israel’s defensive Iron Dome. Consequently, the GCC nations and Israel found their stock of interceptor missiles depleting rapidly. Iran additionally shut down shipping through the crucial Strait of Hormuz. Normally, 18 million barrels per day (mbd) of oil transit through it daily. Post-disruption, the global energy prices escalated. Iran had discovered a weapon with global deterrence value. Until the US blockaded the Strait on April 8, 1.9 mbd were still transiting through it, but this fell to 1.2 mbd by June 1.
Having failed to achieve their principal objectives, the US and Israel now face a new reality. Iran has demonstrated that it can bear pain to protect its core interests. The regime, having survived the assassinations of top civilian and military leaders, today fully controls governance, society and foreign policy in Iran. During the negotiations after the June 19 signing, Iran will forcefully protect its core interests, including its nuclear and ballistic missile programmes and support for its proxies — Hezbollah, Hamas and the Houthis.
Trump now denies ever seeking Iranian regime change, shifting the focus to Iran committing to never acquiring nuclear weapons. Ironically, this was already the declared policy approved by then Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei. Seemingly, the MoU was delayed due to the disagreement on the sequencing of these elements. The 60-day period is to finalise a give-and-take on each side’s key demands. As Trump has repeatedly criticised the release of funds by then US President Barack Obama before the 2015 JCPOA (Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action) agreement, the US may use GCC countries to hand back frozen funds to Iran rather than getting directly involved.
The deal will have regional and global implications. Firstly, Israel is dismayed by it, even attempting to sabotage it by launching attacks on Beirut on June 14. Reportedly, it has demanded Lebanon’s exclusion from the deal, thereby retaining the right to target Hezbollah.
Secondly, Iran’s survival without a surrender has damaged America’s image as the master of global compellence. In 2020, during President Trump’s first term, the Abraham Accords were conceived to align GCC and Arab countries with Israel to isolate Iran. The GCC is divided today, with Saudi Arabia and Qatar having helped Pakistan in finalising the deal. Thus, Accords signatories Bahrain and the UAE are isolated from the combine comprising Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Türkiye and Qatar.
As India is perceived as tilting towards the Israel-US-UAE axis, its diplomatic options are constrained. A diplomatically ascendant Pakistan with a strengthened foothold in the Gulf region and a hotline to the US and China can no longer be ignored or deterred. The broader question arises: would the setback faced by the US in the Gulf impact the existing alliance of far-right governments in democracies in the Americas, West Asia and South Asia.
With Trump’s approval rating at home slipping to 28%, perhaps he had to extract himself from the Gulf stalemate. Are his fresh threats merely an image-building and damage-control exercise or a hint that after the November mid-term polls, he may resume the use of force to achieve what he failed to do through dialogue? Iranians would be preparing for both options.
