Can Trump's Iran deal make it over the 60-day line?

Israel has slammed the deal, which it sees as a "catastrophic capitulation," and has continued attacks on Lebanon despite the agreement's explicit mention not to, casting doubt on its viability

Can Trump's Iran deal make it over the 60-day line?

Donald Trump may believe the deal he has struck with Iran to end the war is a triumph, but that is not how it has been received by many critics of his handling of the war. While the US president insists that the deal will achieve his twin goals of reopening the Strait of Hormuz and ending Tehran’s nuclear aspirations, questions are already being asked as to whether the 14-point Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) that the American president signed amid the splendour of the Palace of Versailles will actually achieve those goals to everyone’s satisfaction.

On the nuclear issue, questions still remain about the fate of the estimated 400 kilogrammes of highly enriched uranium that remains in Iranian hands, while Trump’s claim that freedom of navigation will soon return to the blocked Strait of Hormuz is already being disputed in Tehran. Another perceived weakness of the memorandum is that it also fails to resolve the key sticking points of Israel’s war against Hezbollah in Lebanon.

The concerns about just how effective the agreement Trump has agreed with Iran will be in practice have led many of his more vocal critics to question whether the deal is any better than the terms that were already on offer prior to the US and Israel launching their joint military offensive against Iran on 28 February.

Despite these very real concerns about what the eventual outcome of the final deal that will emerge from the next stage of negotiations, which are due to take place while a further 60–day ceasefire comes into effect, Trump insisted the MoU represented a significant breakthrough in efforts to end the long-running confrontation between the US and Iran, which dates back to Iran’s 1979 revolution.

Announcing the conclusion of negotiations on the MoU at a summit of G7 members at the French resort of Evian-les-Bains, Trump insisted that his allies “love” the preliminary pact, which he said would achieve all of the objectives the US had set out at the beginning of the war. He presented it as a “historic opportunity to prevent Iran from acquiring any nuclear weapon”, as well as ending the conflict and ensuring the strait would reopen.

Despite reports that key figures within the Trump administration, such as Secretary of State Marco Rubio and John Ratcliffe, the CIA director, have expressed concerns about the terms, Trump remained upbeat during a subsequent news conference. The agreement “achieves everything we set out to accomplish, everything and much more,” he said. “Iran cannot have a nuclear weapon; they can’t develop it, buy it; they can never have a nuclear weapon,” he added.

Fears of causing a global recession through his ongoing confrontation with Tehran had been one of Trump's key incentives in sealing a deal.

Trump also threatened to resume military action against Iran if he was not happy with the outcome of the forthcoming negotiations, saying: "It's a memorandum of understanding. If it doesn't get done in 60 days, that's all right, we go back to bombing." He also promised that if Iran "misbehaved" he would "go back to dropping bombs right smack in the middle of their head"—a threat that hardly inspires confidence that the forthcoming negotiations will proceed smoothly.

Key incentive

Nevertheless, the 60-day ceasefire officially came into "immediate effect" after both Trump and Iranian president Masoud Pezeshkian signed the MoU. Upon finalising the agreement during a post-G7 dinner over caviar and hot chocolate pie, Trump declared the signing would have immediate economic benefits for the global community following the economic turmoil caused by the closure of the Strait of Hormuz: "Oil down, stocks up," the president declared.

Indeed, it became clear during the president's subsequent demands that fears of causing a global recession through his ongoing confrontation with Tehran had been one of his primary incentives in sealing a deal. Trump said he had ultimately made the agreement because he did not want to be responsible for an "economic catastrophe". "The one president I did not want to be was the late great Herbert Hoover," he said, in a mention of the US leader who presided over the stock market crash at the beginning of the Great Depression.

The tensions between the two sides, though, were clearly evident when a signing ceremony due to take place in Switzerland involving both US and Iranian officials failed to take place. Instead, Trump signed the deal in France, while Pezeshkian signed in Tehran.

Internal grumblings

Suggestions that Trump's Iran deal has already met with resistance from some of his key aides have also emerged after the Axios news website reported that CIA Director John Ratcliffe had informed Trump and other senior officials that evidence gathered by US intelligence agencies raised serious doubts about Iran's willingness to make the nuclear concessions the US is seeking in any final deal.

Rubio and Hegseth reportedly expressed concerns about the MoU, while Vance, Witkoff and Kushner have advocated in its favour.

In other internal discussions, Rubio and Secretary of Defence Pete Hegseth were both reported to have expressed concerns and raised questions about the MoU, while Vice President Vance and US envoys Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner have advocated in favour of it.

Trump has also encountered criticism from some Senate Republicans over the deal reached with Iran, with one senator accusing the administration of committing "the worst foreign policy blunder in decades".

"Reagan is rolling over in his grave," Republican senator Bill Cassidy declared in a statement posted on X.

"Iran's nuclear ambitions were not curbed, and they have learned that threatening the Strait of Hormuz works and will undoubtedly leverage it in the future," the outgoing Louisiana senator wrote. "Now, Iran gets to build brand-new infrastructure under this deal."

The deal has also attracted criticism in Israel, where the pro-Netanyahu newspaper Times of Israel denounced the agreement as "a catastrophic capitulation to Iran's aggressors" that left the Jewish state "vulnerable and constrained."

By signing his agreement with Tehran, Trump clearly hopes that the Iran conflict is now drawing to an end. But, given the backlash the deal has already attracted, there are clearly no guarantees that this long-running conflict is finally over.

font change