'We have lost': Trump's Iran pact seen as a strategic defeat in Washington
Submitted by
Sean Mathews
on
Thu, 06/18/2026 - 20:56
Iran is reaping strategic and financial gains as a result of the agreement to end the war, pro- and anti-war voices agree
US President Donald Trump, centre left, and French President Emmanuel Macron, centre right, during the signing of a deal with Iran to end the Middle East war, inside Château de Versailles, in Versailles, southwest of Paris, on 17 June 2026 (X account of President Emmanuel Macron/AFP)
Off
Imperial Germany famously signed a treaty under humiliating terms to end WWI at Versailles, codifying a surrender despite the fact that the war was overwhelmingly fought beyond its borders.
Likewise, Iran never got close to US shores during the war, and did not need to.
Its missile and drone attacks depleted the US’s stockpile of air defence interceptors to dangerous levels, while its blockade of the Strait of Hormuz drained Washington’s strategic oil reserve to a forty-year low and starved the global economy of fossil fuels.
The world was facing an “economic catastrophe”, US President Donald Trump said on Wednesday. The US president ended up signing a deal with Iran, at the same French palace where Germany and its foes ended WWI.
The Islamabad Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) between the US and Iran ushers in 60 days of negotiations to reach a permanent end to the war started by the US and Israel. In Washington, both supporters and opponents have called the deal a debacle - even if they agree with ending the war on the MoU’s terms.
"War opponents can be glad the war is over and also point out that this insane deal is a final proof point that the whole war…was a total calamity,” Democratic Senator Chris Murphy wrote on X.
“We are only in this terrible position because of the ‘Neocons’ who pushed [us] into an unwinnable war. Again. This is what happens when you lose a war,” Brandon Weichert, a conservative commentator, wrote on X, referring to Republicans who advocate for foreign intervention.
'Foolish and reckless deployment of power'
Trump jumbled his justification to launch the war on Iran, whose nuclear programme he claimed was already obliterated in a June 2025 attack.
At first he toyed with the idea of overthrowing the Islamic Republic by backing Kurdish fighters and Iranian protesters. He also said the US would destroy Iran’s military and end its ballistic missile programme, which he framed as a threat to the US. He insisted on Iran’s “unconditional surrender”.
Former US officials say Trump’s MoU achieves none of those stated war aims and leaves the US in a weaker position to advance its stated goals at the negotiating table.
“The US deployed its power foolishly and recklessly,” Aaron David Miller, a former Middle East negotiator for Republican and Democratic Presidents, told Middle East Eye.
“We have lost, vis-a-vis Iran, a lot of power and influence. Deterrence is gone. Iran has survived the largest deployment of American air, naval and missile assets since the Second Iraq War,” he added.
'Iran gets its hands on a lot of money'
Besides a pledge not to develop a nuclear weapon - whose construction and use are already prohibited under a Fatwa issued by assassinated Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei - the MoU is vague on Iran’s nuclear programme.
It does not close the door on Iran enriching uranium as part of a final deal. Any Iranian pledge to abide by a moratorium on enrichment would be moot, some experts say, because the US has already caused damage that could take years to repair.
“Iran’s nuclear programme is already years damaged. So if they propose a moratorium they aren’t really offering anything,” David Schenker, a former senior US official now at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, told MEE.
'From outlier to trailblazer': How Oman offers a glimpse into the post-war Gulf
Read More »
Trump added on Wednesday that the US needed a “common sense” approach to Iran’s civilian nuclear programme, angering Iran hawks who oppose any compromise.
US critics have particularly honed in on the financial gains Iran is set to reap.
The MoU waives all sanctions on Iranian oil sales, lifts the US blockade of Iranian ports, and establishes a process for Iran to start recovering its frozen assets, which Tehran says amount to more than $100bn.
“Iran clearly gets a lot of economic benefits from the MoU. What is not clear is how many of these benefits are tied to implementation of a final agreement,” Alan Pino, a former CIA and National Intelligence Council officer, who is now a non-resident fellow at the Atlantic Council, told MEE.
“It seems like these frozen funds might start flowing to Iran during the 60-day period,” he said. “Either way, with the sanctions waiver, it sounds like Iran is going to get its hands on a lot of money without fully complying with the US’s goals and objectives.”
Battle of the clocks
MEE reported after the first two weeks of the war that the US faced a “Suez moment” against Iran, comparing the conflict to late imperial Britain and France’s failed war against Egypt in 1956. Several other news outlets echoed that analysis afterwards.
But Trump continued to wage his war on Iran for another month until signing a ceasefire in early April. The truce was plagued by flare-ups in fighting and hollow threats by Trump to destroy Iran, including its civilian infrastructure.
The US also imposed its own blockade on Iranian ports and vessels in response to Tehran’s taking control of the Strait of Hormuz.
Trump entered the war as a result of Israeli lobbying which pushed the idea that toppling Tehran would be easy, analysts say. When that failed to pan out, he relied on threats and a blockade to impose his peace terms on the country.
Trump bet Iran’s government would collapse. In the end, Iran extracted concessions from Trump because it outlasted him, experts say.
“The US and Iran both had clocks that were winding down for several weeks,” William Usher, a former CIA analyst and Middle East expert, told MEE.
Oil executives warned the global economy faced a supply crunch if the Strait of Hormuz was not reopened by summer. Iran also answered Trump’s threats by warning it could restart attacks on oil-rich Gulf states that are US allies. These countries have invested billions of dollars in the American economy and have also entered into flashy business deals with Trump’s family.
“The US clock wound down first because concerns about rising energy prices hit a fever pitch. Iran had a little bit more sand in the hourglass and is reaping the benefit of strategic patience,” Usher said.
“Iran basically got paid to reopen the strait,” he added.
'Blessing for hedging'
The US and Israeli war on Iran has certainly taken a toll on the Islamic Republic, with strikes pummelling its military-industrial base, civilian infrastructure and energy assets. Trump himself boasted that the US and Israel may have caused $2 trillion worth of war damages.
'Vulnerability exposed': War on Iran will change how the US bases troops in Gulf
Read More »
Iran is wasting little time trying to recoup its losses. The MoU says a final peace deal will include a $300bn mechanism for the country’s reconstruction.
Trump ruled out US funds going to Iran, but acknowledged that he would not stop Gulf states from paying. Talk of Qatar and the UAE paying Iran to end the war is already rife among western and Arab diplomats.
The Arab Gulf states are a useful metric for judging how the war has changed the balance of power in the region. In the war’s early days, many opened their military bases to the US and joined the attack on Iran.
Trump revealed on Wednesday that the UAE’s bombings on Iran were particularly intense. Now, Qatar, the UAE, Kuwait, and Saudi Arabia are pivoting towards a conciliatory position.
“The Gulf states know we [the US] lost and that we can’t protect them from Iran. They are paying Iran for safety, and it appears to be part of a US arrangement,” a former senior US official told MEE.
“The US has given its blessing for hedging,” Schenker summarised to MEE.
Only game in town
The US war on Iran fits a pattern of military interventions the US has carried out over the last two decades that have actually resulted in gains for the Islamic Republic, Usher, the former CIA official said. For example, after the US toppled Saddam Hussein in Iraq, Iran filled the void, pitching itself as the natural partner to the country’s majority Shia population.
“Like the Iraq war, the US has left Iran in a strategically better position,” Usher said.
But the comparison to Germany's signing of the Treaty of Versailles puts the Iran war into context. That deal ushered in the end of Imperial Germany.
Unlike for the Islamic Republic, the war was never existential for the US, experts say, and it remains the dominant power in the Middle East. While the House of Hohenzollern was replaced by the chronically weak Weimar Republic, no one believes that the concessions afforded to Iran will bring about the collapse of the US.
“Is American power and influence in the Gulf fundamentally eroded as a result of this strategic defeat?” Miller, the former US negotiator now at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, said.
"Well, where are the Russians, the Chinese and the Europeans? This was an unprecedented crisis dominated by three countries: the US, Israel and Iran.
“The US is still the only game in town.”
War on Iran
News
Post Date Override
0
Update Date
Mon, 05/04/2020 - 21:19
Update Date Override
0