Oliver Boyd-Barrett
The MOU
There will be no in-person signing ceremony in Geneva for the MOU. This has been signed digitally by US and Iranian leaders, but the formal physical signing and the subsequent follow-up talks were abruptly called off, following clear evidence of Israel’s continued invasion of Lebanon, killings and forced relocation of Shia communities. Pro-Israeli sources claim that Hezbollah killed four Israeli soldiers and that Israel carried out a wave of retaliatory airstrikes in southern Lebanon and the Bekaa valley that killed at least 47 people.
The US-Iranian MOU requires an end to hostilities on all fronts, including in Lebanon.
Devious Macron welcomes Trump at Versailles, chosen as the venue for the Iran-US MoU. Trump always has an eye on the photo op angle in all his pronouncements.
Israel and Hezbollah agreed to renew a fragile ceasefire in Lebanon on Friday June 19 after 24 hours of intense violence that posed an early challenge to the new agreement between the US and Iran to end their conflict. A ceasefire, which in itself is unlikely to prove sustainable, is insufficient to bring about a cessation of hostilities given that Israel has to get out of Lebanon but is showing no signs of being willing to do so.
Defense and Critique
The MOU continues to be defended by the White House in face of growing criticisms from the usual pro-war camps within both Republican and Democratic camps. “The War has diminished Iran!” Trump wrote today. “We didn’t meet out of desperation, Iran did. They are FINISHED! We’ll play out the 60 days. They get no money, not ten cents!”
This is clearly an absurdity; only last Monday Trump was telling the world that the MOU was necessary in order to protect us all against the consequences of diminishing oil reserves. It is far more rational to conclude that at this point Iran has won than that the US has crushed Iran into acceptance of the MOU. The truth is illustrated in comments by Max Blumenthal from The Grayzone News to Mario Nawfal, as summarized by Nawfal: we're in a war cycle that won't end until one side fully capitulates, and in this view, the U.S. already has, Iran’s missile cities held, Tehran’s fast boats kept the Strait closed, and Iran had more cards than anyone admitted (including its ability to strike hard both at Israel and at US assets across the Gulf, the power of its Houthi allies).
Further, the war was fought for no good reason whatsoever, it was fought at the request of Israel, the war has brought no benefits at all to either the US or to Israel, Israel is at the deepest pit of global contempt for the cruelty, immorality and sheer stupidity of zionist ideology and methodology, and both Biden and Trump are a part of that.
What will happen now? Reports to the effect that the US is lifting its blockade and that Iran is allowing the passage of ships through the Strait of Hormuz appear solid. We shall have to wait to see if there is any confirmation of movements by Washington to reduce or remove sanctions and to unfreeze Iranian assets.
As things stand, the U.S. Treasury Department has committed to issuing immediate waivers for the export of Iranian crude oil, petrochemical products, and related banking and transportation services. The U.S. has officially lifted its naval blockade of Iranian ports. The U.S. has agreed to a freeze on implementing new sanctions while talks for a final deal are ongoing. The complete termination of unilateral and multilateral sanctions is deferred to the final agreement, pending a successful 60-day negotiation timeline.
U.S. officials confirmed that any release of funds will be “performance-based”. Iran must demonstrate “good behavior” and make concrete concessions - such as dismantling its nuclear enrichment program and disposing of weapons-grade uranium stockpiles - before funds are released. Tensions remain as the U.S. Treasury has simultaneously explored a mechanism to potentially divert frozen Iranian assets to compensate Gulf allies for war-related damages, a move Iran warns would violate the spirit of the truce.
In short, considering Israel, considering the uncertainties relating to acknowledgment of Iranian control over the Strait, the question of sanctions, and the unfreezing of frozen assets, a great deal can go wrong and probably will go wrong over the next 30-60 days that will either ignite a further round of aggression right away, or following the mid-term elections in the US.
In Israel, some officials warn the deal falls far short of their strategic objectives, leaving the Islamic regime and its ballistic missile programs largely intact. Critics complain that Jerusalem was not briefed on the official terms and Washington declined to share details out of concern for leaks. Some say they fear that Iran will use the 60-day negotiation period as a smokescreen to fast-track its nuclear development and shorten its nuclear breakout timeline, but these sentiments reflect the same fabrications about Iran as a “nuclear threat” that Netanyahu has been pushing for decades even though Israel itself is a nuclear power.
In Lebanon, Israel has pledged to maintain its military deployments and security zones in southern Lebanon for “as long as necessary” to neutralize Hezbollah. Israeli National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir and Defense Minister Israel Katz formally rejected the terms of the MOU, asserting that Israel is a sovereign nation and will not be bound by a deal that compromises its security.
There is also hostility to the MOU in Iran. While President Masoud Pezeshkian and chief negotiator Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf have pushed the 14-point framework as a strategic victory there is said to be intense internal opposition from ultraconservative factions, including the Paydari Party, and media outlets affiliated with the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC). IRGC-affiliated platforms like the Tasnim News Agency have strongly objected to the text because it calls for an immediate cessation of military operations across all fronts, including Lebanon.
Because Israel is not a direct signatory and has continued operations against Hezbollah, elements within the IRGC have demanded that Tehran immediately halt implementation of the MOU and keep the Strait of Hormuz closed until Israel completely halts its campaign. Some politicians, such as Hosseinali Shahriari (Head of Parliament’s Health Committee), have lambasted Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi for putting nuclear enrichment limits on the table. Shahriari criticized the temporary shutdown of the Iranian parliament, accusing the administration of bypassing legislative oversight to sign away the country’s nuclear leverage.
Supreme Leader, Mojtaba Khamenei admitted that he initially disagreed with the deal but ultimately authorized it after receiving personal assurances from President Pezeshkian. Anti-government opposition groups who collaborated with CIA and Mossad instigations of a rebellion in December-January in the context of an economic war against the rial unleashed by US Treasury Secretary, view the agreement with bitter resentment. They feel abandoned by the U.S. administration, warning that the promised $300 billion reconstruction fund and sanctions relief will simply enrich the IRGC and give the ruling establishment financial breathing space to maintain its internal oppression.
Within the US, hostility to the MOU centers on what opponents like to think of as distrust of Tehran, fears of nuclear breakout, and concerns over concessions given. Critics argue the framework resembles appeasement and worry that unfrozen assets will fund regional proxies. In the US it is all but impossible to distinguish between mere rhetoric and misrepresentation, motivated by a desire to suppress a regional rival to the US proxy, Israel as well as to sabotage Chinese economic interests, on the one hand, and something that is more authentically embedded in sound political calculus, on the other.
Much of the discourse surrounding the MOU appears to take seriously the threat of a reduction in global oil reserves and the importance of the MOU in restoring trade normality, even though it is also apparent that for some parties any device is welcome that provides more time for restoring oil reserves, rearming, establishing and amplifying new sources of energy (as from Venezuela, Guyana and Brazil) and carving out new routes for its distribution while preparing other workarounds in the event of a renewal of trouble in the Strait of Hormuz, getting ready for a renewal of the conflict at some not too distant date, on terms much more favorable to the West.
Even among those who fully support the MOU and see it as cementing an Iranian victory there are those who also warn Iran against euphoria and counsel it to avoid the “Minsk trap” - a reference to the deal brokered with Russia by Europe (led by German chancellor Angela Merkel) following defeat of Ukraine’s army at Debaltseve by the Russian-supported independent republics of the Donbass in 2015.
Moscow, which at the time was more easily intimidated by threats of Western sanctions, wasted considerable time vainly trying to persuade its treaty partners to fulfil the conditions of the deal while the US, Europe and Ukraine were using the opportunity of extra time to build up Ukraine’s military forces and fortifications until, in 2021, Europe advised Russia to forget about Minsk - a potent indication, one among many, that Russia must prepare for war.
Bearing this example in mind, Iran must use the opportunity it now has to refurbish its missiles, go nuclear if that is what it intends, rebuild its army and defenses, mend fences if possible with the Gulf States who have now been seriously disabused of their faith in US “protection,” and work closely with BRICS colleagues, especially and above all with China and Russia, for the transition to a more authentically multipolar world.
All Bleak for Trump?
Perhaps not. He can still pose as the great Conqueror of Venezuela and of Cuba. I have covered Venezuela fairly recently in this space, and now we see that Cuba too - inevitably, perhaps - is also rolling over for the Empire.
Cuba’s National Assembly has authorized nearly 200 sweeping free-market reforms and requested urgent international intervention to combat crippling food and fuel shortages. The United States is enforcing a near-total blockade on fuel entering the island, seizing tankers and sanctioning state-owned energy firms like CUPET. These restrictions have caused blackouts that frequently last more than 30 hours, causing mass food spoilage; critically low medicine and medical supplies; municipal trash pickup that has collapsed due to lack of fuel, leaving waste to rot on Havana streets and forcing locals to burn garbage in the sweltering heat, while heightened U.S. sanctions have caused several international entities to halt services and flights to the country.
To stave off a total collapse, Prime Minister Manuel Marrero and President Miguel Díaz-Canel have just announced a landmark package of economic overhauls. The legislative package is considered the most far-reaching since the 1959 revolution. They eliminate most state price controls and allow large private businesses to operate; permit direct foreign investment in the private sector and authorize investments by Cubans living abroad; grant state-run businesses and municipalities more autonomy while simultaneously shrinking the government’s role in the economy; they remove tariffs and taxes on solar technology to spur independent energy infrastructure.
Tariffs
Several key US trading partners and alliances have committed trillions of dollars in investments and energy purchases in exchange for tariff relief or lowered trade barriers.
The European Union committed to $600 billion in new investments and $750 billion in US energy purchases by 2028. This successfully “bought down” import levies, allowing the US to reduce EU tariffs from 30% to 15%.
India has committed to a massive $500 billion “Buy American” procurement program rather than a direct corporate or sovereign investment fund layout.
Following intense negotiations that culminated in an interim trade framework in early February 2026, the two nations restructured their trade terms to reduce economic and political friction
Japan pledged an initial $550 billion in U.S. industries and supply chain enhancements, formalized through a Memorandum of Understanding to lower tariffs on Japanese imports. Subsequent 2026 trade talks also highlighted smaller interim packages, such as a $36 billion investment specifically targeted to avert steep tariff hikes.
The United Arab Emirates (UAE) & Gulf Cooperation Council pledged nearly $4 trillion collectively, with the UAE alone making a $1.4 trillion commitment in exchange for access to closely guarded US AI technologies.
Saudi Arabia pledges for the kingdom have been negotiated and cited at $600 billion with options to scale up depending on trade terms.
Other notable countries and regional blocs that have made substantial investment pledges include South Korea, Taiwan, Bahrain, Qatar, Liechtenstein, and Switzerland.
Supporting Ukraine
Russia has not yet retaliated. The numbers of drones launched by Russia against targets in Ukraine over the past couple of days have been modest. But Military Summary channel reports that a major retaliation is being prepared and four Tu-95 strategic bombers with cruise missiles are ready for combat at Engels airfield with Kiev being the most likely major target (I’m not sure whether that exactly constitutes bone-shuddering threat).
Regardless of whether or not one considers damage to the Moscow oil refinery, startling images of explosions, thick black smoke and black rain over Moscow, and their “proof” of Russian air defense deficiency, as mere performative “pinpricks” that are foolishly designed to disturb what we are told is the reigning sense of “normalcy” - as pro-Russian commentators in alternative media spaces are inclined to do, with assurances as to how “superficial” is the damage and how quickly that damage is repaired (how would these commentators feel about such attacks on their own neighborhoods in London or New York?), Ukrainian drone swarms certainly still seem very rewarding PR efforts. These are functioning successfully to squeeze more money in support of Ukraine from an economically stagnating or declining Europe. I do agree, incidentally, that Western mainstream media, devote far too little attention to the damage inflicted on Ukrainian targets by Russian drones and missiles.
Ukraine’s sponsors are backing a multi-billion-dollar initiative to fund long-range ammunition and supply the Prioritised Ukraine Requirements List (PURL) through which Europe provides money to US weapons manufacturers to provide to Ukraine.
Within the past few days we have been advised to expect the Netherlands to furnish €500 million, of which half will secure weapons through PURL, and the rest will go to drone procurement; Belgium will provide 3 combat-ready F-16s and another 4 for spare parts while promising to hand over its entire F-16 fleet once the newer generation of F-35s is ready; the UK, illegally, says it is going to use frozen Russian funds to pay for 150,000 drones; Australia will throw in another $100 million to bring up Canberra’s contribution to the war to $1.8 billion; Germany will purchase more Norwegian NOMADS short-range air-defense systems for Ukraine, of which 8 have already been supplied; Sweden, Norway and Canada are working on a new military aid package of which Sweden will commit $108 million.
Member states of the Ukraine Defense Contact Group (Ramstein format) have announced new contributions in support of Ukraine. Norway, the Netherlands, Germany, Sweden, Luxembourg, Lithuania, Latvia, Iceland and Australia have for contributed more than $1 billion. Norway, Denmark, Luxembourg, Spain and Lithuania are supporting the Czech ammunition initiative and the delivery of long-range munitions, amounting to more than $500 million. The United Kingdom, the Netherlands and Norway have committed nearly $1 billion toward the production of Ukrainian drones and missiles.
European states have significantly expanded drone-related aid. Norway committed $600 million for UAVs, electronic warfare systems, and explosives, while the Netherlands dedicated $106 million for strike and reconnaissance drones. Poland has heavily invested in deep-strike capabilities and joint drone production. Sweden has announced an $8 billion security assistance package spanning 2026–2027, and the Czech Republic secured a new $72 million package. Allies are backing a multi-billion-dollar initiative to fund long-range ammunition and supply the Prioritised Ukraine Requirements List (PURL). The EU has released nearly €2.8 billion following key reforms in Ukraine’s public finances, agriculture, and energy sectors, bringing the EU’s total support under the “Ukraine Plan” to €29.5 billion.
Europe is increasingly focused on the co-development of capabilities, linking Ukrainian and European private defense markets to ensure speed and innovation.EU leadership is heavily accelerating the integration of Ukraine’s defense industry while working to ramp up broader European defense readiness by 2030 when many European leaders believe they will be at war with Russia.
This all sounds very busy and purposeful, but in totalling the figures I find the overall effort adding up to relatively little.
On the battlefields, Russian forces are continuing to make pressure eastwards on the Slovyansk-Kramatorsk-Druzhkivka conurbation - in the north from Lyman through the forested areas that separate Lyman and Izyum, blocking Ukrainian escape routes from Lyman through Maiaky and Raihorodok, moving west from Dibrova, Orikhuavatka , Yurkivka, Rai-Oleksandrivka to just a few kilometers from Kramatorsk; - in the south, west of Kostiantynivka Russian forces move from Molochavka in the north and Rozkishne in the south, surrounding and likely soon moving directly onto Mykolaivka.
