US defence secretary Pete Hegseth has warned that Washington will reimpose an “ironclad” naval blockade against Iran and restart military operations if Tehran fails to honour its commitments under the preliminary agreement signed yesterday. Speaking in Brussels after talks with Nato defence ministers, Hegseth made clear that the United States viewed the 14-point Islamabad Memorandum of Understanding as a conditional truce, not a final settlement, and that any failure by Iran to meet its obligations would trigger an immediate return to hostilities.
“The president has pointed out that we will be prepared to recommence if underneath the timeline of these talks, Iran does not do what it says it’s going to do,” Hegseth said. “If Iran doesn’t comply, then we’re more than able to reimpose an ironclad blockade.” The warning came barely 24 hours after the deal was signed, underscoring the fragile nature of an accord that both sides have described as a first step rather than a lasting resolution.
Hegseth used the same platform to deliver a blistering attack on Nato allies whom he accused of refusing to support US military operations against Iran. He claimed that European members had denied American forces predictable access to bases and overflight routes, forcing Washington to shoulder a burden that he said threatened European interests even more directly than American ones. “Too many of our allies said no, or tried to drown us in arcane legal debates, or criticised us publicly for doing what they aren’t prepared or able to do themselves,” he said. “It was shameful. These allies, they put America’s sons and daughters, our sons and daughters, at risk.”
The blockade threat and the Nato rebuke are the most aggressive signals yet from the Trump administration that the agreement — formally titled the Islamabad Memorandum of Understanding — is viewed in Washington as a temporary pause rather than a durable peace. US officials have indicated that the military posture in the region will not be reduced until Iran demonstrates compliance, leaving the door open to renewed strikes at any point during the 60-day negotiation window the MOU establishes.
A preliminary deal with high stakes
The MOU, digitally signed by US president Donald Trump and Iranian president Masoud Pezeshkian, is a 14-point framework that sets out the broad parameters for a permanent settlement but leaves the most contentious issues — including the future of Iran’s nuclear facilities, the specifics of sanctions relief, and the status of ballistic missiles — to be negotiated over the next two months. Pakistan acted as mediator, and the document was formally endorsed by Islamabad, whose foreign minister Mohammad Ishaq Dar received congratulations from his Turkish counterpart Hakan Fidan for brokering the breakthrough.
Central to the agreement is the reopening of the Strait of Hormuz, which had been closed since the start of the war and had crippled global oil supplies. Marine Traffic data showed that at least seven vessels crossed the waterway today — four cargo ships, a French-flagged LNG tanker, a Cook Islands-flagged bitumen tanker, and a Panama-flagged vessel heading into the Gulf — marking a modest increase on recent days but still far below the pre-war average of approximately 135 ships per day. The reopening has already sent oil prices tumbling, though experts caution that it may take months for normal shipping volumes to return.
Iran has stated it will not charge for passage during the initial 60-day period, although officials have hinted that tolls or service fees could be introduced later. The deal also provides for the lifting of the US naval blockade of Iranian ports, though Hegseth’s warning makes clear that this concession is reversible at Washington’s discretion. The MOU includes a provision for at least $300 billion in reconstruction and economic development for Iran, but US officials have stressed that this does not involve direct American financial assistance; rather, it is designed to encourage third-country investment once Tehran meets its commitments.
On the nuclear front, the MOU requires Iran to reaffirm that it will not “procure or develop nuclear weapons” and to begin down-blending its stockpile of enriched uranium on site under the supervision of the International Atomic Energy Agency. Rafael Grossi, the IAEA director general, said the organisation was ready to start defining the “concrete steps” that will be necessary. “It is good that the memorandum is there. Now the technical work starts,” Grossi told reporters in Geneva. “Now it is for us to sit down with our American and Iranian colleagues and start formulating concrete steps.” The agreement is notably less detailed than the 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, which ran to hundreds of pages and included strict caps on centrifuge numbers and enrichment levels. The current MOU contains no sunset clauses and leaves the most difficult nuclear questions for the next round of talks, a feature that has drawn criticism from former US officials who argue it achieves even less than the Obama-era deal.
International reactions: relief, caution and criticism
European leaders, who were largely sidelined from the negotiations, have expressed cautious relief that the Strait of Hormuz is reopening. French president Emmanuel Macron said the deal would end “a situation of great instability that had terrible consequences for our economies”. Philippine president Ferdinand Marcos Jr welcomed the return of freedom of navigation, saying it was “what we have been hoping for since the day after the war started”.
Iranian president Pezeshkian described the accord as “historic” and posted an image of the document bearing his signature alongside Trump’s. “This is a historic document and a message from a powerful Iran: peace will be realised in the shadow of mutual respect,” he wrote. “The Islamic Republic of Iran has always been committed and steadfast to global peace while preserving its dignity and independence, as well as to progress and regional cooperation.”
Trump, facing criticism from senior Republicans who called the agreement a blunder and a waste of taxpayer money, dismissed his detractors as “jealous, bad people, or stupid”. In a post on Truth Social, he pointed to record stock market highs and falling oil prices as evidence that his approach was working. “These fools, who think I haven’t been tough enough on Iran, when the Stock Market Just Hit A RECORD HIGH, and Oil prices are ‘tumbling’ down, are either jealous, bad people, or stupid. MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN!!!” Former vice president Mike Pence had described the deal as resembling “appeasement”, while Nikki Haley questioned the commitment to rebuilding Iran. Senator Bill Cassidy called the MOU a “blunder” that did not sufficiently restrict Tehran’s nuclear programme.
In London, UK foreign secretary Yvette Cooper met with Ali Shaath, the general commissioner of the National Committee for Gaza Management, to discuss reviving the stalled 20-point Gaza ceasefire plan that was brokered in October. Cooper described that plan as being “on life support” and said the US-Iran agreement represented an opportunity to inject new momentum. “Now an agreement between the US and Iran has been reached, we must seize this opportunity to hold the parties who agreed the 20-point peace plan to their commitments and to deliver that plan in full, at pace,” she said.
The European Union’s foreign policy chief, Kaja Kallas, found herself at the centre of a diplomatic row after Israeli foreign minister Gideon Saar severed all contact with her, accusing her of “acting obsessively and with blatant unfairness” against Israel. The rupture followed reports in Euractiv that Kallas had compared Israel’s treatment of Palestinians to South Africa’s apartheid era during confidential talks in Mexico City last month. Responding on social media, Kallas did not address the apartheid allegation directly but said she valued “dialogue and engagement” between the EU and Israel. “Dialogue is the foundation of diplomacy, especially when differences arise,” she wrote, while reiterating the EU’s commitment to a two-state solution and condemning illegal Israeli settlements in the West Bank. Earlier this week, Kallas said the EU would explore options for restricting trade with the settlements following calls from several member states.
Israel defies the terms of the deal
Israel has reacted with open scepticism to the US-Iran agreement and has made clear that it does not consider itself bound by its terms. The MOU stipulates “the immediate and permanent termination of military operations on all fronts, including in Lebanon”, but the Israel Defense Forces have issued a statement saying they will continue operating in southern Lebanon within an area they have occupied since the start of the current war. The IDF published a map of its so-called “security zone”, which extends 10 kilometres — more than six miles — into Lebanese territory from the northern Israeli border, and said thousands of residents had been ordered out of towns and villages within that zone.
“IDF forces have established themselves in their area of operations in southern Lebanon and continue to operate to remove threats and improve protection for residents of the north,” the military said. A senior Israeli official close to prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu confirmed that Israel was engaged in “stubborn negotiations” with the United States over its troop deployment in southern Lebanon and had no intention of backing down. The contradiction between the MOU’s ceasefire language and Israel’s ongoing operations has created a fault line that threatens to undermine the agreement before the 60-day negotiation window has even begun.
That fault line was underscored this morning when an Israeli drone strike hit a car near Kfar Tebnit, a village close to the city of Nabatiyeh in southern Lebanon, killing one person, according to the country’s official National News Agency. Israel has continued to bomb Lebanon despite a separate ceasefire agreement reached in April, and the latest strike comes as pressure mounts on the Israeli government to halt attacks following the US-Iran deal. Hezbollah, which controls much of southern Lebanon, is effectively required under the MOU to cease operations, and Iran — its primary patron — is expected to rein in the group as part of the broader cessation of hostilities. Israel has reserved the right to strike back if Hezbollah attacks, but the current pattern of unilateral Israeli strikes suggests that the MOU’s Lebanon provisions are being ignored in practice by one of the key parties to the conflict.
Lebanon’s president, Joseph Aoun, has sought to distance his government from the US-Iran framework, stating that Lebanon’s negotiations with Israel are independent of the deal and emphasising the sovereign decision-making of the Lebanese state. The MOU’s explicit inclusion of Lebanon in the ceasefire, however, means that the success or failure of the broader agreement may ultimately hinge on whether Iran can assert control over its proxies and whether Israel can be persuaded to halt operations that it regards as necessary for its own security.
