CounterPunch Exclusives

CounterPunch Exclusives

The Missing Art of the Deal with Iran

Understanding the MOU

Most of the critical commentary on the Trump administration’s memorandum of understanding (MOU) with Iran centers on the specific commitments each side is supposed to have made and intends to carry out. But the MOU is not a peace agreement; it is a framework for a potential agreement.

Therein lies one of its central problems: the actual terms of a contractual arrangement between the US and Iran governments are matters for future negotiations, whereas the only firm arrangement is for an opening of the Strait of Hormuz by Iran in return for an end to the US blockade of Iran’s ports.

Even then, the opening is tentative; shipping remains dangerous as Iran has indicated dissatisfaction with the route through the Strait, while the US has not withdrawn its naval and air power from the Strait area. In short, nothing about the MOU is certain.

The “understandings” in the MOU are matters of interpretation. Whether or not they lead to a signed agreement depends on how each party assesses the behavior of the other in fulfilling its presumed commitments. Leaders in both countries have expressed doubts about the credibility and reliability of the other—Trump about Iran’s willingness to carry out the MOU’s terms, in which case he has threatened to resume warfare, and Iran about US intentions with regard to its nuclear program and US ties to........

© CounterPunch