Who wins and who loses from US-Iran deal? | DW News

Key Concepts

• Framework Deal: A preliminary agreement outlining the intent to negotiate, rather than a finalized treaty.
• Strait of Hormuz: A critical global oil shipping route currently under dispute regarding management and access.
• Abraham Accords: A series of agreements aimed at normalizing relations between Israel and various Arab nations, currently described as being in jeopardy.
• Buffer/Security Zones: Military-controlled areas established by Israel inside Lebanese territory (approx. 10km deep) and Gaza.
• Unfreezing Assets: The potential release of approximately $44 billion in Iranian funds currently held under international sanctions.
• Strategic Ambiguity: The lack of clarity regarding the specific terms of the deal, particularly concerning Iran’s nuclear program and ballistic missile capabilities.

---

1. Overview of the US-Iran Agreement

The US and Iran have announced a framework for a 60-day ceasefire intended to end the ongoing conflict. Key components include:

• Strait of Hormuz: Plans to reopen the route to international shipping. Iran asserts it will manage the strait alongside Oman, a claim the US has not publicly acknowledged.
• Sanctions and Assets: The potential unfreezing of $44 billion in Iranian assets and the lifting of the US naval blockade on Iranian ports.
• Scope of Ceasefire: Iran insists the ceasefire covers all fronts, including Lebanon. The US administration has remained silent on this, while Israel has explicitly rejected it, continuing military operations.
• Nuclear Program: The issue remains unresolved, with Iran stating it will not be part of the current framework, but rather a second-stage negotiation.

2. Political Perspectives and Arguments

• The Iranian Position: Scott Lucas (University College Dublin) argues that Iran is in a stronger political position than before the conflict. Despite severe economic damage and the assassination of leadership figures, Iran has successfully maintained its nuclear program, avoided discussing its ballistic missile program, and gained leverage over the Strait of Hormuz.
• The US/Trump Administration: The administration is attempting to frame the deal as a "personal triumph" for Donald Trump, focusing on the reopening of oil routes to lower domestic gas prices ahead of congressional elections. Critics, however, view the deal as a "shambles" that failed to achieve the original goal of "dominance" or the dismantling of Iran’s nuclear capabilities.
• The Israeli Perspective: The Netanyahu government is reportedly in a state of crisis. Having failed to achieve stated goals—such as regime change in Iran or the total dismantling of Hezbollah—the government fears the US may "ditch" them or prevent further military action in Lebanon. There is internal friction, with some ministers claiming the deal does not bind Israel.

3. Real-World Applications and Consequences

• Economic Impact: The conflict has caused global oil prices to spike. The deal is intended to stabilize these markets, though the long-term impact remains uncertain.
• Regional Alliances: The conflict has strained relations between the US and Gulf states (Saudi Arabia and Qatar). The "Abraham Accords" project is described as being "sabotaged," with only the UAE remaining a committed partner in the current US-Israel project.
• Humanitarian Toll: The conflict has resulted in significant casualties: approximately 3,800 deaths in Lebanon since March 2nd, over 3,000 in Iran since February 28th, and the loss of 13 American servicemen.

4. Methodology and Process

• Negotiation Framework: The deal is currently a "framework" to be signed in Switzerland on Friday, followed by a 60-day period to "hammer out" specific details.
• Mediation: The process was mediated by Oman, though reports suggest that Jared Kushner and Steve Whitcom (Trump’s envoys) were heavily influenced by Qatar, leading to internal Israeli frustration.
• Military Strategy: Israel continues to maintain "security zones" in Lebanon and Gaza, with the defense minister indicating that infrastructure in these areas will be destroyed to prevent civilian return, regardless of the ceasefire framework.

5. Notable Quotes

• Scott Lucas: "It’s not just a compromise; it’s a shambles." (Regarding the Trump administration's handling of the deal).
• Tanya Kramer (reporting from Israel): "There is a lot of criticism leveled at Netanyahu... you hear the words of failure; this is a bad deal."
• Australian Prime Minister: "We want this agreement to stick because it is in the interest of people in that region to end the military conflict."

6. Synthesis and Conclusion

The US-Iran agreement represents a fragile, vague framework rather than a comprehensive peace treaty. While it provides a temporary pause in hostilities and a potential path to reopening the Strait of Hormuz, it leaves critical issues—such as Iran’s nuclear program, the status of regional proxies, and the future of Israeli security zones—largely unaddressed. The deal appears to be a face-saving measure for the Trump administration, which has failed to achieve its strategic goal of regional dominance, while simultaneously alienating key allies and failing to secure the long-term stability of the Middle East. The success of this agreement remains highly contingent on the specific details to be negotiated in the coming 60 days.