A memorandum of understanding has now been signed by Iran and the US, with both sides agreeing to its points (text here). The deal commits the US to: unfreezing Iranian assets held overseas (~USD $100 billion); arranging a USD $300 billion “reconstruction and economic development fund” for Iran; ending sanctions on Iran’s oil sales; and ending the naval blockade of Iran.
Iran in return “reaffirms” it will not seek a nuclear weapon.
Crucially, the MOU insists on an end to fighting in Lebanon, where Israel has been seeking to remove Hezbollah and annex the southern border region. The MOU also states Iran will dialogue with Oman “to define the future administration and maritime services in the Strait of Hormuz”, i.e., potentially, a toll.
The MOU’s 60-day timeline fits Trita Parsi’s analysis that Iran recognises June-August as their window of opportunity for the most favourable deal.
What does it all mean? From demanding unconditional surrender in March, the US has now accepted a rising Iran.
The economics of the deal will invariably lead to a stronger Iran in the long-term. Moreover, the $300 billion fund points to increasing integration between Gulf oil – who will be the investors – and Iran, the military and demographic power in that arrangement.
According to Robert Pape, Professor of International Relations at the University of Chicago, “This is an admission of the balance of power changing dramatically, and it’s an admission by the United States that it is okay with that.”
The inverse is a sudden drop in Israel’s position. Turning to Pape again: “When you have power trajectories like this that I’m describing: a rising power, especially an abruptly rising power; a precipitously declining power, Israel. That plants the seeds for conflict.”
“And this is one of the huge issues we see in history. So it is no surprise that Prime Minister Netanyahu, many leaders in Israel, many supporters of Israel, are apoplectic about what they are seeing.”
Israel cannot match Iran, however, without US backing. US bases in the region are badly damaged or destroyed and it’s not clear they are coming back. Seeing which way the wind was blowing, Gulf states began to block US use of their facilities and airspace as the war progressed.
For former US colonel Douglas Macgregor, this is all the effect of technology. Permanent overhead satellite surveillance combined with missiles and drones makes the US forward-force projection model obsolete.
“Warfare has changed,” he argues. “The old instrumentalities don’t work anymore, because the old instrumentalities were legacies of that imperial past.”
The strengthening of the Islamic Republic is hardly a positive development. But the long-term upside of this picture is that self-defence becomes cheaper, and even powerful countries will struggle to invade others.
Sign Up To Our Free Newsletter