US-Iran ceasefire agreement expires amid mutual accusations of violations

A ceasefire agreement between the United States and Iran signed in June is expiring this week with no indication either side intends to renew it. The Memorandum of Understanding, negotiated in Pakistan and signed by President Donald Trump and Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian on June 17, was meant to end more than three months of warfare that had killed thousands and strangled global commerce, particularly oil and gas shipments through the Persian Gulf. Within days of signing, both nations accused the other of violations. By early July, Trump declared the agreement dead. Now, as the accord formally expires on Monday, the two sides have hardened their positions and escalated their rhetoric in ways that suggest the conflict could resume.

The original agreement was ambitious in scope but deliberately incomplete. It called for an immediate halt to military operations and committed both sides to negotiate a final comprehensive deal within 60 days. The US pledged to lift its naval blockade within 30 days, remove forces from Iranian borders after a final agreement was reached, and provide at least $300 billion in reconstruction aid while terminating sanctions and releasing frozen Iranian assets. Iran agreed to clear mines from the Strait of Hormuz, allow ships to pass freely for two months, and reaffirm it would not pursue nuclear weapons. The accord left the thorniest issues—Iran's nuclear program, the conflict in Lebanon, and control of the strait itself—to be resolved later.

The agreement unraveled almost immediately. Disagreements emerged over whether the accord was a ceasefire or a permanent settlement, and what each side was actually obligated to do. Trump called Iranian military strikes in the region a "foolish violation" within ten days. Iran countered that US strikes violated the agreement's core terms. By July 7, Trump announced the accord was finished. The US continued military operations, including strikes on what Iran described as civilian infrastructure, killing at least 50 people. Iranian officials responded by saying the US had violated and suspended all its commitments, and that Tehran had done the same. The promised reconstruction money never materialized. Trump dismissed the idea of paying Iran, suggesting instead that Tehran owe compensation for deaths it had caused over decades. The naval blockade remained in place. Control of the Strait of Hormuz—one of the world's most critical shipping lanes—became a flashpoint, with both sides insisting they controlled it and accusing the other of violations.

Iran's Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi signaled on Saturday that his government has no interest in resuming negotiations with Washington. He emphasized that Iran is pursuing a separate agreement with Oman regarding shipping routes through the strait, but only if a political solution emerges. Meanwhile, mediators from Qatar and Pakistan continue exchanging messages with Tehran, though their influence appears limited. On the American side, Trump told supporters in New York on Friday that the US would soon claim the Strait of Hormuz as its own territory. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent promised economic measures against Iran that have "never been seen" before.

Analysts and officials differ sharply on what the expiration means. Araghchi argued that the agreement was always meant to be a permanent end to war, not a temporary ceasefire, so there is nothing to extend. Since the US violated the terms and continued attacking, he said, there was no 60-day pause that required renewal. A professor at Tehran's University of Applied Sciences told Al Jazeera that the ceasefire "stopped and was rendered obsolete" when the US failed to comply with its obligations—specifically the release of frozen assets, lifting of sanctions, removal of the naval blockade, and Israeli withdrawal from southern Lebanon.

Iran's recent security appointments suggest a tougher negotiating posture ahead. The former head of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, Mohsen Rezaei, was named to lead Iran's Supreme National Security Council, a move analysts say indicates Tehran believes it has military advantage and intends to synchronize its military and civilian operations more closely. Any future negotiations, according to the same analyst, would likely see Iran making broader demands: an end to the war in Gaza, lifting of sanctions and blockades on Yemen, and even Israeli nuclear disarmament.

The US, by contrast, appears to have fewer levers to pull. According to Barbara Slavin, a fellow at the Stimson Centre in Washington, American stocks of interceptor missiles have been depleted, strategic oil reserves drained, and military hardware including aircraft carriers have been kept deployed far longer than planned. Economically, the US has already exhausted most sanctions options. Iran, meanwhile, has demonstrated it can inflict economic damage by disrupting traffic through the strait. Slavin noted that Iran is "playing hardball," making the international economy and Trump "sweat." She predicted the conflict would ultimately resolve through a negotiated deal, likely after the American midterm elections when electoral considerations matter less.

Iranian Parliament Speaker Mohammad Galibaf told reporters in Tehran on Saturday that the concessions Iran secured in the June agreement were "a source of pride and victory." He declared that Iran had "truly emerged victorious in this war, both militarily and politically." Whether that assessment holds as the agreement expires and the two sides face an uncertain path forward remains to be seen.