The MoU may pause the war, but it leaves
Israel exposed while giving
Iran relief before real verification.Republican political strategist, foreign policy analyst and former surrogate for
Donald Trump’s 2016 and 2024 presidential campaigns.Published On 19 Jun 2026There is a particular kind of deal that feels triumphant on the day it is signed and corrosive on every day thereafter. The 14-point memorandum of understanding (MoU) the
Trump administration concluded with
Iran this week is shaping up to be exactly that species of triumph – the kind that requires applauding quickly, before anyone understands the implications.Start with what is genuinely credible, because it is real. The president’s campaign on ending a shooting war, not managing one indefinitely, and a negotiated halt to active hostilities – one that reopens the
Strait of Hormuz, lifts a naval blockade, and stops the bombing on all sides – is not nothing. Wars that end through exhaustion rather than victory still end, and the alternative to this MoU was not a better deal sitting on the table; it was an open-ended military commitment with no obvious exit. Give credit where it belongs: This administration was willing to use force when diplomacy failed, and willing to negotiate once force had made its point. That sequencing – military pressure first, diplomacy second – is precisely the theory of the case this president has always offered, and on its own terms it is not unreasonable.But this triumph also has a very obvious shortcoming. The ceasefire was negotiated without the ally that has borne the highest cost for confronting
Iran for the past two decades:
Israel. The talks ran through Washington, through Pakistani mediators, through
Geneva and
Versailles – everywhere, it seems, except
Israel, the number one
United States ally in the region, which has spent years absorbing
Hezbollah rockets,
Houthi missiles, and the slow bleed of an Iranian proxy network built to destroy it. An ally who supplied the intelligence, the targeting, and in no small part the military rationale for the February attacks on
Iran that began this war is now being asked to treat as settled a document it had no hand in drafting. That is not the treatment one extends to a partner. It is the treatment one extends to a complication.