The Surprising Reaction Inside Iran to Its War Victory

On June 15, 2026, U.S. President Donald Trump and Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian digitally signed a memorandum of understanding aimed at ending the ongoing conflict between their nations. The agreement, described as an "interim" framework, outlines steps to halt military operations that began on February 28, 2026, and includes commitments from both sides to address key issues related to Iran's nuclear program and broader regional stability. According to reports, the document consists of 14 points and sets the stage for further negotiations, with a 60-day window beginning in Switzerland for discussions on a potential final peace deal.

The memorandum also includes provisions for the United States to lift sanctions on Iran and unfreeze financial assets tied to the Iranian government. Additionally, the U.S. pledged to collaborate with regional partners to create a reconstruction and economic development fund totaling at least $300 billion for Iran. These terms mark a significant shift in U.S. policy toward Iran, particularly given the long-standing tensions surrounding Iran's nuclear ambitions. However, the agreement has sparked controversy, especially among U.S. political figures who view it as either a major concession or a strategic misstep.

The U.S. delegation reportedly did not share the memorandum with the Israeli government, despite ongoing concerns about Iran's influence in the region. This omission has raised eyebrows, particularly as Trump has publicly criticized Israel's military actions in Lebanon. Meanwhile, the Israeli public reaction to the deal appears to be overwhelmingly negative. Polls indicate that only 11 percent of Israelis believe their country emerged victorious from the conflict, while 71 percent doubt that Trump will prioritize Israeli interests in future negotiations. Some Israeli politicians have expressed frustration, with one member of parliament famously removing his "Make America Great Again" cap and replacing it with a "Total Victory" hat—a reference to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's rhetoric during the Gaza conflict.

Inside Iran, the response to the agreement has been mixed. While some media outlets and officials have celebrated the diplomatic breakthrough, others remain wary. For example, the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps-aligned newspaper Javan published a front-page image depicting Iranians breaking through a wall of perceived U.S. threats. However, the nation's mood is not entirely celebratory. Many citizens recall past instances of betrayal, including Israel's unilateral refusal to participate in a ceasefire in Lebanon earlier this year and the use of prior negotiations as a pretext for military buildup in 2025 and 2026. As a result, the general sentiment leans more toward caution than outright triumph.

Diplomatic efforts have faced internal challenges within Iran as well. The leadership team headed by Chief Negotiator Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf and Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi has drawn subtle criticism from supporters of the Front of Islamic Revolution Stability, a powerful conservative faction in the Iranian Parliament. These critics argue that the current approach lacks sufficient strength and does not adequately reflect the nation's strategic interests. Some of these criticisms have surfaced in state-controlled media, prompting interventions from high-ranking officials, including rumored involvement from Ghalibaf's advisors.

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth added another layer of complexity to the situation by criticizing European NATO allies for failing to grant U.S. forces access to bases in Europe for potential operations against Iran. He labeled this lack of cooperation as "shameful," indicating that the U.S. may reassess its military presence in Europe over the next six months. His comments highlight the growing rift between the U.S. and its traditional allies, especially in light of the new agreement with Iran.

As the negotiations progress, the international community remains divided on the implications of the U.S.-Iran deal. While some see it as a step toward de-escalating tensions in the Middle East, others fear it may embolden Iran's nuclear ambitions or weaken U.S. credibility with its allies. With the upcoming mid-term elections in the U.S. and the uncertain trajectory of relations with Israel, the impact of this agreement will likely be scrutinized closely in the coming months. The ultimate success or failure of the deal will depend on how effectively both parties can navigate the complex web of geopolitical interests and domestic pressures.