Six Real Threats to Trump’s Iran Deal—and the Only Way It Might Succeed

## Introduction Since the announcement of a US-Iran understanding to end the three-and-a-half-month war, the world has been watching the future of this deal, expected to reshape tensions in the Middle East. However, this "fragile truce," as described by The Independent, faces six real threats that could lead to its early collapse. What are these threats, and is there a single mechanism that could save this deal from failure?

## The nature of the deal: From a memorandum to a fragile truce Why is this deal considered fragile? First, it is merely a non-binding memorandum, meaning either party could withdraw with limited political cost. Second, it lacks a fixed timeline for achieving declared goals, such as ending Iran’s nuclear program or halting the activities of regional militias. Instead, it only includes a temporary 60-day military operations halt, extendable indefinitely—making it closer to a temporary truce than a lasting peace agreement. Additionally, the deal does not address Israel’s key demands, such as stopping Hezbollah’s activities in Lebanon, leaving the door open for renewed escalation.

## Iran’s religious institutions: The fog of final decision-making Despite being signed by Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian, ultimate authority rests with the religious establishment, which has not yet declared its final stance. Historically, this institution has rejected any compromise with the US, as seen during the 2015 nuclear deal negotiations. If no consensus is reached, it may reassess or even reject the agreement, putting its survival at risk.

## Declared goals vs. reality on the ground None of the declared goals set by the US and Israel at the start of the war—such as toppling the Iranian regime, ending the nuclear program entirely, or dismantling Iran’s ballistic missile capabilities—have been achieved. Instead, the deal permits continued civilian nuclear activity and does not halt Iran’s support for regional militias. Recent attacks by Iran on US targets in some Gulf states further raise doubts about its commitment.

## Israel’s role: A critical security gap Israel is not explicitly mentioned in the deal, a significant omission. Previously, Israel conducted airstrikes on Iranian targets in Syria and Lebanon without facing decisive US retaliation. If Israel’s security is not guaranteed, it may take unilateral actions that could jeopardize the truce. The absence of a mechanism to pressure Iran into stopping its support for Hezbollah weakens the deal’s credibility.

## Financial support: The Gulf states’ commitment in the balance A major incentive for Iran to accept the deal is the easing of sanctions and access to funding from Gulf states. However, after Iran’s recent attacks on US targets in some Gulf countries, these states are hesitant to fulfill their financial pledges. Without this support, Iran may reconsider its commitment, especially under domestic economic pressure.

## Political opposition in the US: Trump between supporters and opponents President Donald Trump faces significant political opposition to his deal with Iran. Iran has long been portrayed as a primary enemy in US political discourse, with figures like former Vice President Mike Pence describing any such deal as "appeasement." If Trump fails to rally domestic support, he may be forced to backtrack under public or congressional pressure.

## The only path to success: Mutual commitment and alternative economics Despite the six threats, there is one path that could save this deal from collapse: mutual commitment. Iran must demonstrate a genuine halt to its support for regional militias, while the US must offer real economic incentives, such as gradual sanctions relief or security guarantees for Gulf states. Additionally, Gulf states must fulfill their financial commitments to ensure Iran’s economic stability, encouraging its continued adherence to the deal.