A Final Iran Deal Is Far From a Sure Thing

The U.S. and Iran signed a memorandum of understanding last week in which they agreed to end hostilities and engage in negotiations to resolve their disputes. President Donald Trump hailed the deal, calling it an “unconditional surrender,” by Tehran.

Whatever one might mean by that term, this is surely not it. A plain reading of the text shows that Iran secured some major benefits, including sanctions waivers on its oil sales that are expected to bring in billions of dollars in new revenue. Indeed, many analysts have argued that the memorandum in fact marks a defeat for the U.S., as it shows that the Trump administration is unable or unwilling to use the military force necessary to drive Iran into submission.

But in many ways, such an assessment is premature. The memorandum is an interim agreement: It sets the stage for attempts to bring this war to an end. Whether it will actually end—and, if it does, whether the final outcome will favor the U.S. or Iran—remains to be seen. Despite mediators from Pakistan and Qatar reporting “encouraging progress” during an initial round of talks in Switzerland last weekend, negotiators still have major gaps to overcome, such that a final agreement that both sides can commit to seems unlikely.