After more than a hundred days of war, bombings, constant threats and an energy crisis that put half the planet on alert, which they had maintained since the end of February. Donald Trump celebrated that the pact is now closed and Pakistan, mediator of the talks, confirmed that both parties will officially sign on June 19 in Switzerland a memorandum of understanding intended to seal the end of hostilities.
The news was received with relief in the markets and in the main capitals and states of the world. However, once the initial euphoria has passed, questions surrounding this peace agreement begin to appear. Because The agreement exists, but its details remain largely unknown.
Beyond the political announcement, fundamental questions remain to be clarified that will determine whether peace is truly lasting or simply a temporary truce between two historic enemies.
Hormuz reopens, but no one knows the exact conditions
The most immediate and tangible measure . For months, the blocking of this strategic step has become one of the main factors of international tension. Approximately 20% of the oil consumed in the world circulates through its waters and its closure set off alarms in the energy markets, causing strong fluctuations in crude oil prices. We have all paid for it.
Trump announced that the United States will immediately lift the maritime blockade that it maintained over Iranian ports and authorized the total reopening of the commercial route.
However, it is not clear what mechanisms will guarantee the safety of maritime transit or what will happen if either party considers that the other is not fulfilling its commitments. From Tehran they have already warned that they will respond forcefully to any violation of the agreement. Peace, but with tweezers.
The great mystery remains the nuclear program
If there is one issue that was at the origin of the crisis, it is the Iranian nuclear program. During the negotiations, The Trump Administration insisted that the main objective was to prevent the Islamic Republic from developing a nuclear weapon. Washington demanded verifiable guarantees, permanent limitations and the delivery or destruction of the enriched material accumulated by Tehran.
Iran, for its part, has always defended that its program has exclusively civil and scientific purposes. None of the parties has yet explained whether any concrete commitment has been reached on this issue and it is not known which organizations will supervise compliance with the possible agreements or what margin Tehran will retain to continue developing its atomic program.
Another key point revolves around economic sanctions. For years, restrictions imposed by the United States and its allies have hit the Iranian economy hard, limiting its exports, hampering access to international markets and tying up billions of dollars in assets.
The Islamic Republic has repeatedly demanded the lifting of these sanctions as an essential condition for any lasting agreement. For now, Washington has only confirmed the lifting of the naval blockade linked to the war. There is no official information on possible additional economic relief, although various Iranian media claim that the issue has been part of the negotiations.
Israel, the uncomfortable actor in the agreement
The peace announced between Washington and Tehran also leaves questions about Israel’s role.
The war began on February 28 with a joint offensive by the United States and Israel that ended withith the death of Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. Since then, Benjamin Netanyahu’s government has maintained a much more aggressive position than that defended by the White House in recent weeks.
In fact, according to various media, Trump He would have privately shown his displeasure over some Israeli operations carried out while the negotiations were progressing.
Pakistan assured this Sunday that the agreement contemplates the end of military operations on all fronts, including Lebanon, but it is still unclear to what extent Israel feels bound by the commitments reached between Washington and Tehran.
From regime change to the negotiation table
Perhaps the greatest paradox of this entire crisis is the point at which it ends. When the war began, Trump promised a quick victory. He spoke of just five weeks of operations and assured that military pressure would lead to a regime change in Tehran.
More than three months later, the scenario is very different. The supreme leader died during the early stages of the conflict and was replaced by his son, Mojtaba Khamenei. The Iranian political system survived. The Strait of Hormuz It remained closed for months. Energy prices skyrocketed. And the United States ended up sitting down to negotiate with the same Iranian leaders it had promised to defeat.
For now, the photograph is of two enemies who have decided to stop shooting at each other. But the real examination will begin after the signing scheduled for June 19 in Switzerland. It will be then when the details of the agreement are known and when both parties must demonstrate that they are willing to comply with it.
Because the war seems to be over. What remains to be seen is whether peace will be able to withstand decades of mistrust, rivalry and confrontations between Washington and Tehran.
