The world initially reacted with relief to the framework agreement between Iran and the USA in mid-June, but disillusionment soon followed. The 60-day agreement was intended to bring about a ceasefire, a reopening of the Strait of Hormuz and a long-term peace solution. After the agreement expires, we can take stock: What did the agreement achieve?
Immediate ceasefire
The agreement called for an immediate ceasefire between Iran, the US and their respective allies, including fighting in Lebanon. In fact, the guns did not remain silent for long. The tenor from Washington was initially: US attacks on Iranian targets were only limited retaliation for Iranian attacks on merchant ships; the ceasefire still applies. Finally, in July there were massive attacks every night for almost two weeks. US President Donald Trump declared on social media that the ceasefire was “OVER”.
At the end of July, Trump again threatened Iran with an even more violent wave of attacks. “We will hit them very hard,” he said. “You know, at some point they won’t be able to take it anymore.” The attacks ultimately failed to materialize, citing alleged progress in the struggle for a diplomatic solution. Recently there have been no reports of US attacks, but there have been repeated suspected Iranian attacks on ships in the Strait of Hormuz.
In Lebanon, the ceasefire can be described as fragile at best - Israel has recently increased its attacks on targets of the pro-Iranian Hezbollah militia there. The Houthi militia in Yemen, which is also linked to Iran, recently made a name for itself again with threats and attacks against Saudi Arabia: There is a risk of an expansion of the conflict, which could then also endanger oil deliveries through the important Bab al-Mandab strait.
“Final deal”: ceasefire after 60 days?
The framework agreement gave the warring parties 60 days to resolve particularly contentious issues such as how to deal with Iran's nuclear program. The ambitious negotiation deadline should be extendable by mutual agreement. However, such a “final deal”, more comparable to a ceasefire agreement, is not in sight. At the end of June there was a start to negotiations in a Swiss luxury resort, but then things became very quiet. Discussions at working level were supposed to follow. However, there was no known progress, certainly no breakthrough.
The framework agreement now expired - either at the weekend or today, the exact date remained unclear. Neither warring party appears to be seeking an extension of the narrow, 14-point agreement.
Iran's Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said at the end of last week that the US had violated the agreement and resumed attacks. This meant that there was no ceasefire that needed to be extended. It has not yet been decided whether there will be further negotiations.
Lifting of sanctions
In the framework agreement, the US government committed to lifting “all sanctions” against Iran. However, the timetable should only be agreed in the final agreement. Probably as a sign of goodwill, the USA actually relaxed certain sanctions against the Iranian oil sector after the agreement came into force. A good two weeks later, however, the US Treasury Department withdrew the exemption granted due to Iran's behavior in the Strait of Hormuz.
Opening of the Strait of Hormuz
Before the war began at the end of February on Trump's orders, ships transported around a fifth of global crude oil and liquid natural gas exports through the strait largely undisturbed. After the war began, the Iranians paralyzed the Strait of Hormuz with threats and attacks on ships, and they are also said to have laid sea mines. Oil and gasoline prices rose rapidly worldwide.
As a result of the framework agreement, the Islamic Republic should make “best efforts” to provide merchant ships with safe passage through the strait free of charge for 60 days. The vague wording “to the best of our ability” is one of several in the agreement that left a lot of room for interpretation and was therefore vehemently criticized.
After the agreement was signed, traffic in the strait initially increased - not nearly to pre-war levels, but still. But soon there were new Iranian attacks on ships and traffic almost came to a standstill again. In consultation with the other neighbor of the strait, the Sultanate of Oman, Iran wants to charge a fee for the passage in the future. The USA rejects this. Iran wants to control the passage in the future and is demanding, among other things, reparations from the USA for war damage in order to reopen it. A safe opening of Seestrasse is currently not in sight.
For Iran, control of the strait is probably its most important trump card. For the US President, the problem caused by his war is a particularly tough nut to crack: threats of attack, US military escorts for ships, an annexation of the Strait of Hormuz - his ideas have not yet led to a solution. The US naval blockade of Iranian ports, which was lifted with the framework agreement, is now in place again. The aim is to cut Tehran off from important oil export revenues in order to increase pressure on the Islamic Republic.
$300 billion investment program
For the reconstruction and development of Iran, the USA agreed in the agreement to set up an investment program worth 300 billion US dollars together with partners in the region. The necessary mechanism for this should be lashed down with the “final deal”. But the cloudy promise didn't make much of a splash, because hardly anyone could imagine that the USA or the states in the Persian Gulf that were attacked by Iran during the war would pay billions for this.
The promise to release frozen Iranian money after the implementation of the framework agreement also remained unfulfilled.
What's next?
Mediators Pakistan and Qatar, as well as other Gulf states, appear to be working behind the scenes to make progress toward an agreement in the deadlocked conflict. However, when or whether such progress will occur is completely unclear.
