The U.S.-Israeli war on Iran was meant to break the Islamic Republic. Instead, the warring sides are edging toward an interim agreement that would leave Iran battered but not broken.
As the outlines of a potential deal emerge from sources familiar with the discussions, Iran appears set to emerge economically shattered and with its military-industrial base severely degraded, but with hard-line Revolutionary Guard dominance more firmly entrenched than before.
2 View gallery
(Photo: Hamed Jafarnejad/ISNA/WANA (West Asia News Agency) via Reuters, Shutterstock, Alex Brandon/AP)
Even if a memorandum on ending the war is agreed soon, diplomats, officials and regional analysts say it is less likely to be a lasting breakthrough than a temporary truce.
They describe the likely outcome as a bargain designed to reopen the Strait of Hormuz, ease economic pressure on global financial markets and Iran, and give U.S. President Donald Trump a political off-ramp while deferring the more intractable issues to a later date.
“There have been extraordinary tactical military successes and no fundamental strategic gains,” said Dennis Ross, a former senior U.S. diplomat. “There is no file that has been closed.”
After U.S.-Israeli strikes on Iran began on February 28, Trump said they were aimed at eliminating imminent threats from Iran, citing its nuclear and ballistic missile programs, and urged Iranians to take control of their country.
Under an emerging memorandum described to Reuters by sources familiar with the discussions, Iran would lift its effective blockade of the Strait of Hormuz, a major artery for global oil supplies, and secure financial relief through the release of frozen Iranian assets or limited sanctions relief.
Iranian officials see a narrow deal as a way to buy time, unlock financial relief and contain rising domestic risks over a deteriorating economy without addressing the more contentious issues.
Trump, with one eye on the November midterm elections to Congress, wants language allowing him to claim progress on Iran’s nuclear program, particularly its stockpile of highly enriched uranium, which is needed to make an atomic bomb.
The main drivers of the war would remain largely intact: Iran refuses to abandon enrichment, Washington is unwilling to offer Iran security guarantees, and Israel remains determined to contain an adversary it sees as an existential threat.
Iran calculates that it can deter future attacks only if it retains its missile arsenal, its regional network of allies and the ability to disrupt Gulf energy flows.
“What Trump needs politically and what Iran is willing to give may look close, but the overlap is minimal,” said Alan Eyre, a former U.S. diplomat and Iran expert.
The model, he said, is to reach a deal now and “kick all the tough issues to a phase two” that is unlikely to follow.
Trump appears set to be left with a short-term ceasefire, an ambiguously worded commitment on highly enriched uranium and the Strait of Hormuz still under Iranian control, according to two regional sources familiar with the discussions.
Regional analysts say that even if the strait is opened, it will, as one analyst put it, remain “basically under Iranian control,” regardless of how any passage fees are structured.
Washington has largely dropped its focus on ensuring Iran’s ballistic missiles are dismantled, despite Israeli and Gulf concerns, the sources said.
Obstacles include Iranian demands to link any agreement to Israel halting attacks on Hezbollah, and Trump’s desire to get the optics right on the nuclear issue, the sources said.
They said Trump has, in effect, accepted a linkage between Lebanon and the strait despite publicly denying it. He has pressed Israel to halt strikes on Beirut and its southern suburbs, wary that any escalation there could derail efforts to secure a deal on the strait.
Iran sees the immediate release of about $12 billion in frozen assets as central to any deal, and is unlikely to move ahead without it, the sources said.
David Schenker of the Washington Institute for Near East Policy said Trump wants to avoid comparisons with the 2015 nuclear deal reached under former President Barack Obama, but that releasing Iranian funds risks inviting exactly that charge.
“I’m not sure there’s any way around it,” Schenker said.
In 2018, Trump pulled the United States out of the 2015 deal, under which Iran agreed to curbs on its nuclear program in exchange for the lifting of sanctions. He said the agreement failed to protect U.S. national security interests.
Trump now wants wording that allows him to claim a win on Iran’s nuclear program without escalating the war.
“I think you can end up with language that each side interprets their own way. And then the subsequent negotiations will be quite fraught,” Ross said.
Analysts say any pause in the conflict is likely to leave the Revolutionary Guards emboldened.
“Before they were the power behind the throne, and now they are the power,” Schenker said.
For Israel, an interim deal is likely to be deeply troubling, with Iran’s leaders continuing to frame the war in stark ideological terms and signaling that no agreement will resolve the underlying conflict.
“For Israel and Iran, this chapter of the war may have ended, but the conflict is not ending,” Ross said.