Hormuz reopening hinges on Iran deal
Washington, June 14
The Trump administration on Sunday signalled that a memorandum of understanding aimed at ending the conflict with Iran could be signed within hours, potentially reopening the Strait of Hormuz and paving the way for broader negotiations on Tehran's nuclear programme.
Senior US officials appearing on Sunday news programmes expressed confidence that the agreement remained on track despite lingering tensions in the region and fresh Israeli strikes against Hezbollah targets in Lebanon.
"From all I know, we are on track. It's not a matter of if, it's a matter of when," US Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth said in an interview with CBS News.
US Ambassador to the United Nations, Mike Waltz, echoed that assessment on ABC News, saying President Donald Trump had "every intent" of getting the agreement completed.
"The teams have their hands full dealing with them, but President (Trump) has every intent to get this done," Waltz said, referring to Iranian negotiators.
The proposed memorandum would mark the first formal step toward ending more than three months of conflict that has disrupted shipping through the Strait of Hormuz, one of the world's most important energy corridors.
According to the administration, the agreement would eventually reopen the waterway and begin a process aimed at dismantling Iran's nuclear programme.
Hegseth said the arrangement would be "performance-based" and insisted Tehran would receive no benefits unless it complied with its commitments.
"There will be no money released to Iran until they perform," he said.
"There's no trust here, and we're going to verify everything."
Waltz said the US administration expected Iran to abandon key elements of its nuclear programme and end support for regional proxy groups.
"The highly enriched uranium has to go. Their enrichment capabilities, they have to walk away from. Their support for terrorist proxies has to end," he added.
The US administration also rejected comparisons with the 2015 Iran nuclear agreement negotiated under former President Barack Obama.
Hegseth said that the earlier accord "was a path to a bomb", while the proposed agreement "will be a wall to a bomb".
The emerging deal, however, has drawn criticism from some former officials involved in the Obama-era negotiations.
Former President Barack Obama said it was "doubtful that any agreement that arises is going to be significantly different or a significant improvement from the deal that we had in the first place".
Former Deputy Secretary of State Wendy Sherman, who helped negotiate the earlier accord, said any final arrangement would require extensive technical work and warned that the process could take far longer than the 60-day framework currently being discussed.
--IANS
int/lkj/ksk/khz
— IANS
Reader Comments
The irony is thick as morning chai. Obama's deal was "a path to a bomb" according to Hegseth, but now Trump's administration is basically trying to revive the same framework with different packaging. 🤔 As an Indian, I just hope our energy security isn't collateral damage in this political theatre. Strait of Hormuz is literally where 20% of global oil passes through
As someone who follows international affairs closely, I find it hard to believe that a 60-day framework can address all the technical complexities of nuclear verification. Wendy Sherman makes a valid point. Also, Israel's strikes on Hezbollah show this region is a powderkeg. Let's hope the deal actually sticks this time
Interesting how both US administrations are trying to claim the moral high ground. Obama says the new deal won't be much different, while Trump's team says the old one was flawed. The truth probably lies somewhere in between. For India, stability in Hormuz is non-negotiable. Our refining capacity depends on Gulf crude
The headlines say "reopening" of Hormuz like it's a highway closure. This is about war and peace in the Middle East. I hope our government is working behind the scenes to ensure India's interests are protected. We have 8 million Indians working in the Gulf region. Their safety should be priority number one
Performance-based agreements sound good on paper, but who monitors compliance? The IAEA? US intelligence? Iran has a history of
We welcome thoughtful discussions from our readers. Please keep comments respectful and on-topic.