Imperial Germany famously signed a treaty under humiliating terms to end WWI at Versailles, codifying a surrender despite the fact that the war was overwhelmingly fought beyond its borders.
Likewise, Iran never got close to US shores during the war, and did not need to.
Its missile and drone attacks depleted the US’s stockpile of air defence interceptors to dangerous levels, while its blockade of the Strait of Hormuz drained Washington’s strategic oil reserve to a forty-year low and starved the global economy of fossil fuels.
The world was facing an “economic catastrophe”, US President Donald Trump said on Wednesday. The US president ended up signing a deal with Iran, at the same French palace where Germany and its foes ended WWI.
The Islamabad Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) between the US and Iran ushers in 60 days of negotiations to reach a permanent end to the war started by the US and Israel. In Washington, both supporters and opponents have called the deal a debacle - even if they agree with ending the war on the MoU’s terms.
New MEE newsletter: Jerusalem Dispatch
Sign up to get the latest insights and analysis on
Israel-Palestine, alongside Turkey Unpacked and other MEE newsletters
"War opponents can be glad the war is over and also point out that this insane deal is a final proof point that the whole war…was a total calamity,” Democratic Senator Chris Murphy wrote on X.
“We are only in this terrible position because of the ‘Neocons’ who pushed [us] into an unwinnable war. Again. This is what happens when you lose a war,” Brandon Weichert, a conservative commentator, wrote on X, referring to Republicans who advocate for foreign intervention.
'Foolish and reckless deployment of power'
Trump jumbled his justification to launch the war on Iran, whose nuclear programme he claimed was already obliterated in a June 2025 attack.
At first he toyed with the idea of overthrowing the Islamic Republic by backing Kurdish fighters and Iranian protesters. He also said the US would destroy Iran’s military and end its ballistic missile programme, which he framed as a threat to the US. He insisted on Iran’s “unconditional surrender”.
Former US officials say Trump’s MoU achieves none of those stated war aims and leaves the US in a weaker position to advance its stated goals at the negotiating table.
“The US deployed its power foolishly and recklessly,” Aaron David Miller, a former Middle East negotiator for Republican and Democratic Presidents, told Middle East Eye.
“We have lost, vis-a-vis Iran, a lot of power and influence. Deterrence is gone. Iran has survived the largest deployment of American air, naval and missile assets since the Second Iraq War,” he added.
'Iran gets its hands on a lot of money'
Besides a pledge not to develop a nuclear weapon - whose construction and use are already prohibited under a Fatwa issued by assassinated Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei - the MoU is vague on Iran’s nuclear programme.
It does not close the door on Iran enriching uranium as part of a final deal. Any Iranian pledge to abide by a moratorium on enrichment would be moot, some experts say, because the US has already caused damage that could take years to repair.
“Iran’s nuclear programme is already years damaged. So if they propose a moratorium they aren’t really offering anything,” David Schenker, a former senior US official now at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, told MEE.
'From outlier to trailblazer': How Oman offers a glimpse into the post-war Gulf
Read More »
Trump added on Wednesday that the US needed a “common sense” approach to Iran’s civilian nuclear programme, angering Iran hawks who oppose any compromise.
US critics have particularly honed in on the financial gains Iran is set to reap.
The MoU waives all sanctions on Iranian oil sales, lifts the US blockade of Iranian ports, and establishes a process for Iran to start recovering its frozen assets, which Tehran says amount to more than $100bn.
“Iran clearly gets a lot of economic benefits from the MoU. What is not clear is how many of these benefits are tied to implementation of a final agreement,” Alan Pino, a former CIA and National Intelligence Council officer, who is now a non-resident fellow at the Atlantic Council, told MEE.
“It seems like these frozen funds might start flowing to Iran during the 60-day period,” he said. “Either way, with the sanctions waiver, it sounds like Iran is going to get its hands on a lot of money without fully complying with the US’s goals and objectives.”
Battle of the clocks
MEE reported after the first two weeks of the war that the US faced a “Suez moment” against Iran, comparing the conflict to late imperial Britain and France’s failed war against Egypt in 1956. Several other news outlets echoed that analysis afterwards.
But Trump continued to wage his war on Iran for another month until signing a ceasefire in early April. The truce was plagued by flare-ups in fighting and hol…
Read the full article at Middle East Eye →
United Kingdom