The 14-point Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) signed on June 17 between United States President Donald Trump and Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian officially expired this Monday. The agreement, which was brokered by Pakistan, was intended to initiate a 60-day window for peace negotiations and establish a ceasefire. Despite the pause in full-scale combat, the broader conflict that began on February 28 remains unresolved, with both sides now locked in a cycle of renewed hostilities.
Under the terms of the now-defunct agreement, both nations committed to an “immediate and permanent termination of military operations on all fronts, including in Lebanon.” The US had pledged to lift its naval blockade within 30 days, withdraw forces from the vicinity of Iran following a “final deal,” and initiate a reconstruction and development package for Iran valued at no less than $300 billion. Additionally, the US agreed to remove sanctions, grant waivers for Iranian oil exports, and facilitate access to frozen overseas funds.
In exchange, Iran promised to clear mines from the Strait of Hormuz and permit commercial vessels to pass “with no charge” for a 60-day period. Tehran also reaffirmed its commitment to refrain from developing nuclear weapons and expressed a willingness to negotiate uranium enrichment issues. The framework stipulated that further implementation details would be solidified in a “final deal” supported by the United Nations.
However, the agreement began to unravel almost immediately due to ambiguous language and conflicting interpretations. Joey Hood, former acting director of the Office of Iranian Affairs at the US State Department, described the MoU as “doomed to fail,” arguing it was “very poorly written.” Hood suggested that professional diplomatic oversight would have prevented the document from granting Iran potential sovereignty over the Strait of Hormuz, a critical point of contention.
Disputes centered on three specific articles. Article 5, which promised “safe passage of commercial vessels,” failed to define authorized routes through the strait. This led to confusion involving Oman’s territorial waters, resulting in the targeting of the Singapore-flagged vessel Ever Lovely on June 25. While Iran denied involvement, President Trump labeled the incident a “foolish violation” of the ceasefire.
Article 1, which mandated the cessation of military operations, became a point of friction because it omitted any mention of Israel. Iran contended that the ceasefire should apply to Israeli actions in Lebanon, a position rejected by Israel. Furthermore, Article 6, which addressed the $300 billion reconstruction fund, provided no clarity on funding sources or expenditure restrictions, while the agreement itself remained vague regarding whether sanctions relief applied only to US measures or included UN-mandated restrictions.
The collapse accelerated on June 27 when US Central Command (CENTCOM) struck Iranian radar sites and missile storage facilities along the southern coast. Washington characterized the strikes as a response to the earlier vessel attack. The Iranian Foreign Ministry condemned the action as a violation of the MoU, while Mohsen Rezaei, an adviser to Supreme Leader Mojtaba Khamenei, accused the US of breaching the agreement’s safe passage provisions. Iran subsequently retaliated by targeting US military installations in the region.
Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesperson Esmaeil Baghaei stated that the 60-day deadline is now “entirely moot” because the US violated the agreement just weeks after its signing. Baghaei asserted that Tehran has likewise suspended all its commitments. With both nations having “locked horns,” experts see little prospect for reviving the MoU or reaching a new settlement in the near future. The report also notes that the war on Iran, which began on February 28, is far from resolved, while full-scale fighting has been paused for the time being. The report also notes that the Islamabad-brokered MoU was supposed to kick-start a 60-day period for peace talks between the two sides and included provisions for the reopening of the Strait of Hormuz, which has become a major flashpoint in the war. The report also notes that however, the vague wording of many of the clauses caused major disagreements – in particular over who had ultimate control over shipping through the strait, with Iran launching strikes on several ships which had failed to follow its approved route. The report also notes that as a result, the US re-launched strikes on Iran, triggering more attacks by Iran on US military assets in Gulf countries and Jordan as well as on energy and other infrastructure. The report also notes that we look at key moments of the MoU and why it broke down. The report also notes that it was a ceasefire agreed after high-level talks hosted and mediated by Pakistan and triggered a 60-day period for negotiations aimed at reaching a wider peace deal. The report also notes that ultimately, the woolly wording of the MoU was to blame for it breaking down. The report also notes that it never would have been written the way that it was, hood said that “if there were professional diplomats involved from the US side.
Source: Aljazeera
