When it was signed at the end of the G7 summit on June 17, the US-Iran memorandum of understanding (MoU) was hailed as a diplomatic breakthrough. By reopening the Strait of Hormuz, easing sanctions and launching a 60-day negotiating process, it felt like a positive step on the road to ending a conflict that has threatened regional stability and the global economy.

Yet the past weekend’s events have exposed the agreement’s fragility. While US and Iranian negotiators reported progress in the first round of talks in Switzerland, the US president Donald Trump’s renewed threats of military action against Iran and the physical security of Iranian negotiators prompted fears that the diplomatic process may break down and the conflict resume in earnest.

The status of the Strait of Hormuz, arguably the only positive takeaway for the US from the MoU, also remains uncertain.

So as it stands, the agreement is better understood as enabling a pause in hostilities than an actual settlement. It largely restores pre-war conditions while leaving tensions between the US, Iran and Israel unresolved.

Israel remains the elephant in the room. It is deeply affected by the deal but is not a party to it. And it’s still capable of undermining any diplomatic progress with its continuing assault on Lebanon in contravention of the MoU.

The most likely outcome is a return to grey-zone conflict, meaning hostile measures that stop short of outright shooting warfare. In this case, proxy warfare, cyber operations,........

© The Conversation