Ryan Costello is Policy Director with the National Iranian American Council (NIAC), where he has worked since 2013. In this role, Ryan directs NIAC’s policy team in its work to influence policymakers, monitor legislation, conduct research and writing and coordinate advocacy efforts. He is on X @RyeCostello.
A familiar pattern is repeating itself as U.S. President Donald Trump threatens to abrogate his country's memorandum of understanding (MOU) with Iran, which fostered a shaky ceasefire between the two countries on June 17. Between July 8-9, U.S. strikes on Iran targeted military and civilian infrastructure, triggering Iranian retaliation against American bases in Bahrain, Kuwait, Qatar and Jordan. The exchanges continued throughout the week, leaving the state of talks between the two countries in serious question.
The MOU struck between the U.S. and Iran in mid-June established a process to formally end the illegal war of choice that the United States and Israel launched without United Nations Security Council or Congressional approval on Feb. 28. Traffic through the Strait of Hormuz quickly increased while the United States eased economic pressure on Iran by allowing it to sell oil. Yet not even halfway through the 60-day period set out to negotiate a final agreement, which would entail concessions from Iran regarding its nuclear program and a permanent arrangement for the Strait of Hormuz, the political will to reach a final deal is in serious doubt.
Competing visions of the MOU's text have plagued its implementation from the start, with the Strait of Hormuz constituting the immediate flashpoint, alongside Israel's ongoing war on Lebanon. Both states have failed to utilize the dispute resolution mechanism envisioned in the deal, instead resorting to bombing to build leverage. Washington has sought to set up a rival southern route along Oman's coast, while Iran has insisted that traffic flow according to the northern route it established along its coast.
The decision to renew attacks amid ongoing funeral ceremonies for Iran's late Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, only adds salt to the wound.
- Ryan Costello
As a result, Iran likely fired on several ships between July 8-9 as they attempted to use the U.S.-supported southern route, prompting Washington to withdraw the sanctions waiver that the Treasury Department released on June 22, which allowed Iran to sell oil on the open market as part of the MOU. The Trump administration also conducted the heaviest strikes since the MOU's signing within Iran, largely focusing on the southern coast straddling the Strait.
Now, President Trump has declared the ceasefire all but dead, indicating that he wants nothing to do with Iran while describing its leaders as "scum." The feeling is assuredly mutual on the Iranian side, where officials are well acquainted with the U.S. government's duplicity on agreements. That dynamic includes Trump leaving the 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), known colloquially as the "Iran nuclear deal," President Biden's decision to cancel humanitarian relief negotiated in a prisoner swap in 2023 and Trump twice using negotiations as cover to launch wars in June 2025 and February 2026.
The decision to renew attacks amid ongoing funeral ceremonies for Iran's late Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, only adds salt to the wound. Khamenei was killed in an Israeli and American strike at the opening of the war. Those ceremonies have witnessed mass turnout despite the Islamic Republic's crackdown on mass protests in January.
Recent remarks from Vice President JD Vance indicate what Washington may have envisioned all along: a pause to calm energy markets and refill stockpiles, rather than a genuine effort to end the war. As he stated on The Michael Knowles Show, "What the president has told us to do is use this MOU to sort of refill the world's oil economy, to refill some stocks, and then to see where the hand is." Yet, the brief pause provided by the MOU has not allowed the U.S. to significantly replenish its strategic oil reserve, which was dangerously low in June. That means that a renewed outbreak of war could have major economic consequences for ordinary Americans.
Despite a ceasefire and the MOU, negotiations have only taken the states one step forward and two steps back. The time to rescue the diplomatic process may be running out, but the gains from that process are still attainable.
- Ryan Costello
If the MOU collapses, any hope to end this war in the near term will likely dissipate as well. That outcome would be terrible for the American and Iranian people alike, alongside the millions of other people in the region stuck in the line of fire. The global implications are similarly profound, with the economic fallout of this catastrophic war already hitting far too many communities and sending upwards of 32 million into poverty.
These developments underscore what opponents of war with Iran have long forewarned: A war with Iran is easy to start but difficult to finish, offering no solutions to the challenges posed by the Islamic Republic. The "12-day war" with Iran last June was hailed as decisive, with Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu arguing that their military operations obliterated Iran's nuclear and missile program. Yet hostilities resumed just months later.
Despite a ceasefire and the MOU, negotiations have only taken the states one step forward and two steps back. The time to rescue the diplomatic process may be running out, but the gains from that process are still attainable.
Hardliners in both the United States and Iran do not hope to see negotiations between their respective countries succeed. Those in Washington who boisterously call for the White House to "finish the job" disguise their true interest: a forever war. Yet such an outcome could haunt both countries for generations and should be avoided at all costs.
For now, those advocating for a return to war in Tehran have been an isolated minority. Yet if the MOU proves to be just another brief detour back to war, it will become a consensus position within the Islamic Republic. Such a development would empower American hardliners all the same, making any diplomatic offramp much harder to discover, let alone operationalize.
The views and positions expressed in this article are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of DAWN.
