Eigen RadarGeopolitics
Archive
Analysis

The US-Iran Islamabad memorandum expires with no final deal and an unresolved strait clause

The 17 June US-Iran memorandum expired with no UN-backed final deal. Al Jazeera ties the collapse to a disputed Hormuz clause, a ceasefire line omitting Israel and a 300 billion dollar pledge without a stated source.

Geopolitics··Evening
A laden bulk carrier steams through a hazy, hot strait with a grey warship holding position in the distance and an arid rocky shore in the foreground.

Sixty days end with no Security Council-backed final deal

The memorandum the United States and Iran signed on 17 June expired on Monday, its 60-day negotiating period having produced no broader agreement. Al Jazeera reported that the memorandum Donald Trump and Masoud Pezeshkian signed ends on Monday and that neither capital has offered to extend it. The text promised a final deal, endorsed by the UN Security Council, within 60 days; that deal was never written. Under the memorandum, Washington was to lift its naval blockade within 30 days, terminate sanctions, issue waivers for Iranian oil exports and begin a reconstruction package of at least 300 billion dollars. Tehran was to clear mines from the Strait of Hormuz, allow ships to pass free of charge for 60 days and reaffirm that it would not seek nuclear weapons. Trump declared the agreement finished on 7 July, and Iranian officials said they had suspended their own commitments in turn. Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said on Friday that the memorandum recorded the end of the war rather than a ceasefire, so there was no 60-day clock to extend.[2], [1]

Article 5 left the Strait of Hormuz route open to dispute

Al Jazeera's Monday account traces the collapse to three clauses: the transit article on the Strait of Hormuz route, a ceasefire article that never mentioned Israel, and a 300 billion dollar reconstruction promise with no stated source. The route dispute surfaced on 25 June when vessels following the Omani course were struck; Washington counterattacked on 27 June and Tehran retaliated. Trump declared the agreement over on 7 July. Joey Hood, a former acting director of the US Office of Iranian Affairs, told Al Jazeera the text was poorly drafted and gave Iran room to read the transit article as recognising its sovereignty over the strait. The talks remain deadlocked, and no framework has been announced to replace the memorandum. Araghchi's Friday framing that the document described war termination rather than a ceasefire sits beside Hood's reading that the strait clause was ambiguous from the start.[1]

Blockade enforcement continued as commitments were suspended

Even as both sides suspended commitments, enforcement did not pause. The Pentagon said this week it had fired on a Panama-flagged cargo ship in the Strait of Hormuz for breaking the US blockade against Iran, a blockade the memorandum required Washington to lift within 30 days. Al Jazeera's reporting placed that strike inside a wider pattern of Hormuz tension after vessels on the Omani route were hit in late June. Washington and Tehran therefore entered the expiry date with parallel claims that the other had already walked away, while US naval action in the strait continued. Neither capital offered to extend the memorandum, and the Security Council endorsement that would have turned a bilateral understanding into an internationally enforceable instrument remained conditioned on a final deal nobody drafted.[2], [1]

References

  1. News sourceAl JazeeraArticle 5 left the strait to interpretation, and the memorandum ran out on it↩1↩2↩3
  2. News sourceAl JazeeraThe Islamabad memorandum runs out with no final deal behind it↩1↩2
Chip wars and the supply chainRussia-Ukraine warMiddle East balance of powerEnergy transition and climate

More analysis from this desk

View all Brief analyses from the Geopolitics desk →