Trump's agreement does not bind us.
In a Swiss resort near Lucerne, the United States and Iran signed a memorandum of understanding on Friday, pausing a conflict that had rattled global energy markets and displaced tens of thousands of Lebanese civilians. The agreement reopens the Strait of Hormuz and begins sixty days of nuclear talks — a fragile architecture of peace built, as so many are, atop an unresolved contradiction: Iran insists Israel's military presence in Lebanon violates the deal, while Israel insists the deal does not bind it. History has seen such arrangements before, where the ink of diplomacy dries faster than the fires it was meant to extinguish.
- Iran and the U.S. formalized a ceasefire in Switzerland, immediately lifting naval blockades and restoring Iranian oil exports — markets exhaled, with crude falling to $80 a barrel before the signatures were even dry.
- Iran's foreign minister declared the deal a four-party accord binding Israel and Hezbollah, insisting any Israeli military action in Lebanon after signing constitutes a violation — a framing Israel flatly rejected.
- Israeli forces remain dug into a twenty-five-mile security zone in southern Lebanon, conducting drone strikes that killed at least four people days before the signing, with tens of thousands of Lebanese civilians already displaced.
- Trump publicly complained that Israel had handled the Hezbollah conflict too slowly and too destructively, yet simultaneously suggested the agreement did not constrain Israeli operations — a contradiction he appeared willing to leave unresolved.
- Congressional critics from both parties demanded the secret deal text be released, questioning whether the U.S. had simply restored pre-war conditions at enormous human and economic cost.
- A vague 'mechanism' buried in the memorandum would allegedly activate if Israel violated the terms — but neither government disclosed what it was, leaving the deal's enforcement as opaque as its origins.
On Friday, American and Iranian officials gathered at a Swiss mountain resort near Lucerne to sign a memorandum of understanding — a document that would extend their ceasefire, reopen the Strait of Hormuz, and begin sixty days of nuclear negotiations. The relief was immediate and tangible: Iranian oil tankers, which had already begun slipping past the American naval blockade days earlier, would now move freely. Sanctions on Iranian oil lifted at once. Oil prices, which had climbed above one hundred dollars a barrel since the war began in late February, fell to eighty dollars. European markets rose. The promise of cheaper energy moved through global supply chains like a long-held breath finally released.
But beneath the market optimism, a fundamental dispute threatened the entire arrangement. Iran's foreign minister declared that the memorandum was not merely a bilateral U.S.-Iran document — it was a four-party accord, binding the United States and Israel on one side, Iran and Hezbollah on the other. Under this interpretation, Israeli forces remaining in southern Lebanon, or any Israeli strikes there after the deal took effect, would constitute a violation. Israel rejected this framing entirely. National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir stated plainly that Trump's agreement did not bind Israeli military operations. Israeli troops remained in a security zone stretching roughly twenty-five miles into Lebanese territory, and drone strikes continued — killing at least four people in southern towns just days before the signing.
President Trump, attending the G7 in France, expressed frustration with Israel's conduct, saying he was 'not happy' with how the Hezbollah campaign had been handled and criticizing the destruction of civilian apartment buildings. Yet he also suggested the deal did not constrain Israel — aligning himself with Tel Aviv even as he complained about the pace of its operations. The contradiction appeared to be one he was prepared to leave standing in order to claim a diplomatic victory and move forward.
The memorandum's terms remained largely secret. Vice President JD Vance, who signed on behalf of the United States, described it as 'very general' — roughly a page and a half. What would happen to Iran's enrichment program, how sanctions relief would be structured, and what 'mechanism' might be triggered by Israeli violations were all deferred to the sixty-day negotiation period ahead. Democrats in Congress demanded the text be released immediately, with some questioning whether the war had simply restored conditions that existed before it began — an open strait, a fragile calm — at enormous cost in lives and credibility. The signing proceeded. What would follow remained unresolved.
On Friday, in a Swiss mountain resort near Lucerne, the United States and Iran were set to sign a memorandum of understanding that would extend their ceasefire, reopen the Strait of Hormuz, and launch sixty days of negotiations over Iran's nuclear program. The agreement promised immediate relief: Iranian oil tankers would be permitted to move freely again, sanctions on Iranian oil sales would lift at once, and a U.S. naval blockade that had choked off Iranian ports for two months would end. By Tuesday, three days before the signing, the first Iranian crude carriers had already slipped past the American blockade line, carrying nearly four million barrels between them.
Yet even as markets celebrated—oil prices tumbling from over one hundred dollars to eighty dollars per barrel, European stocks climbing, the promise of cheaper energy rippling through global supply chains—a fundamental disagreement threatened to unravel the entire arrangement. Iran's foreign minister, Abbas Araghchi, stood before foreign diplomats in Tehran and declared that any Israeli forces remaining in southern Lebanon, or any Israeli military strikes there after the deal took effect, would constitute a violation of the agreement. He went further, arguing that the memorandum was not merely a bilateral document between Washington and Tehran, but a four-party accord: the United States and Israel on one side, Iran and Hezbollah on the other. This framing was crucial. It meant, in Iran's view, that Israel's conduct in Lebanon was bound by the terms.
Israel rejected this interpretation entirely. On Monday, National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir stated flatly: "Trump's agreement does not bind us." Israeli officials said troops would remain in a security zone stretching roughly twenty-five miles into southern Lebanon, territory they had occupied for three and a half months. The fighting there had been relentless. On Tuesday alone, Israeli drone strikes killed at least four people in the towns of Mayfadoun and Shukeen. Since Monday, at least five had died in Israeli operations in the south. Tens of thousands of Lebanese civilians had already fled the occupied areas.
President Trump, attending a G7 summit in France, expressed frustration with the situation. He told reporters he was "not happy" with how Netanyahu had handled the conflict against Hezbollah. "They should have been able to do the job faster," Trump said. "It just goes on forever, and when that happens, it throws a negative light on the big deal." He criticized the scale of Israeli operations, noting that apartment buildings were being destroyed in the search for individuals, killing civilians who had nothing to do with the militant group. Yet Trump also suggested the agreement did not bind Israel's actions, aligning himself with the Israeli position even as he complained about the pace of operations.
The terms of the memorandum remained largely secret. Trump said he would release the text at a press conference on Friday, reading it "word by word" so the press would cover it accurately. Vice President JD Vance, who would sign the document on behalf of the United States, described it as "very general," spanning roughly a page and a half. The details—what would happen to Iran's uranium enrichment program, how sanctions relief would be structured, what "mechanism" might be triggered if Israel violated the agreement—were all deferred to the sixty-day negotiation period that would follow the signing.
This opacity infuriated Democrats in Congress. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer demanded Trump release the text immediately, saying the American people deserved to know what had been agreed to after more than one hundred days of bloodshed. Connecticut Senator Chris Murphy called the war a "dumpster fire" and suggested Trump was hiding the agreement because it would expose the conflict as a disaster. Republican Senator Lindsey Graham, a longtime Iran hawk, expressed skepticism but said he was willing to "wait and see." Georgia Senator Raphael Warnock pointed out that the deal appeared to restore conditions that existed before the war began: the Strait of Hormuz would be open again, but it had been open before. He questioned whether the United States was actually safer, and whether the war had damaged American credibility.
Meanwhile, the machinery of the agreement was already turning. Iranian tankers moved through the Gulf of Oman. The U.S. Navy confirmed it was lifting its blockade. Oman, which shares coastlines with Iran on the Strait of Hormuz, coordinated with Tehran on a new system to manage shipping traffic through the vital waterway. Trump promised the strait would be "permanently toll-free"—a reference to Iran's past practice of charging transit fees. Oil markets responded with enthusiasm. The price of Brent crude fell below eighty-one dollars per barrel for the first time since early March. European stock indices climbed. Wall Street anticipated a long-term fix to the inflation that had plagued the global economy since the war began in late February.
But the central tension remained unresolved. Iran's deputy foreign minister said a "mechanism" in the memorandum would be activated if Israel violated the agreement. What that mechanism was, neither government had disclosed. Israel showed no sign of withdrawing from Lebanon. Trump, eager to claim victory and move forward, seemed willing to let the contradiction stand. The signing was set for Friday. What would happen after remained unclear.
Citas Notables
They should have been able to do the job faster. It just goes on forever, and when that happens, it throws a negative light on the big deal.— President Trump, on Netanyahu's handling of the Lebanon conflict
Any continued occupation of Lebanese territory will be regarded by us as a violation of the memorandum of understanding.— Iran's Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi
La Conversación del Hearth Otra perspectiva de la historia
Why does Iran think it can dictate what Israel does in Lebanon when the deal is between Washington and Tehran?
Because Iran sees this as more than a bilateral agreement. Their foreign minister explicitly told diplomats that the U.S. and Israel are one party, and Iran and Hezbollah are the other. From their perspective, if the U.S. committed to ending the war on all fronts, including Lebanon, then the U.S. is responsible for ensuring Israel complies.
But Trump and his officials keep saying the Israel-Hezbollah conflict is separate from the Iran deal.
They do say that. The U.S. Ambassador to Israel posted that Iran and Hezbollah aren't linked in the deal. Yet Trump himself is frustrated with Netanyahu for dragging out the Lebanon operation because it's casting a shadow on the bigger agreement. So there's a contradiction built in from the start.
What happens if Israel keeps striking Lebanon after Friday?
Iran says it will trigger a "mechanism" in the memorandum. But nobody knows what that mechanism is because the text hasn't been released. It could mean anything from escalating rhetoric to military action. That's the real danger—the ambiguity.
Is the deal actually going to hold?
The oil markets think so. Prices are falling, stocks are rising. But Congress is demanding to see the actual text. Democrats are calling it a disaster. Republicans are skeptical. And the core issue—whether Israel leaves Lebanon—is completely unresolved. It could fall apart in sixty days, or it could hold if both sides decide the alternative is worse.
What do the Lebanese people want?
They want their country back. Tens of thousands have evacuated from the south. They're caught between Israeli occupation and the uncertainty of whether any agreement will actually force a withdrawal. Right now, they're just waiting.