Read the daily news to learn English

Middle East crisis live: Tehran says it will charge ships in strait of Hormuz after 60 days; US-Iran presidents sign peace deal

Pakistani prime minister Shehbaz Sharif said earlier in the day that the agreement between the US and Iran agreement was taking “immediate effect” after being signed by both sides. He said on social media that “as a first step, Islamic Republic of Iran will instantly reopen the Strait of Hormuz and the United States of America will immediately lift the naval blockade”. Sharif, who helped mediate the memorandum of understanding, also reportedly said there would still be a formal signing ceremony in Switzerland on Friday to “commemorate this landmark event and commence with the technical level talks”.

Western Europeans believe crime is rising despite fall in overall rates, poll finds

Western Europeans believe crime is rising in their country, according to a survey, despite long-term overall crime rates falling across the region since the mid-1990s. The YouGov poll of Britain, Denmark, France, Germany, Italy and Spain found most countries trusted their national police, led by Denmark where 74% of respondents said they had a lot or a fair amount of confidence in police nationally. Between 57% and 64% of respondents in Spain, France, Germany and Italy also said they felt the same, but Britain was an outlier: only 43% said they had a lot or a fair amount of confidence in the police nationally, compared with 53% who had little. But while most western Europeans said they trusted their police, often sizeable majorities – ranging from 53% in Denmark to 66% in the UK, 78% in France and 80% in Italy – also said they thought crime was rising in their home countries. Asked whether they thought violent crime was also increasing, the responses were largely similar: 52% of respondents in Denmark and 59% in Britain said they thought violent crime had gone up a lot or a bit, rising to 76% in Italy and 77% in France. In fact, despite recent spikes in some violent crimes, often linked to drug trafficking in some countries – notably France and Germany – and a significant increase in online fraud almost everywhere, crime rates generally have been falling since 2000. Western Europe is much safer today than it was in the late 1980s and 1990s, with murder rates – considered the most reliable metric because homicide is almost always reported – plunging dramatically since 2000, according to Eurostat. In western European countries such as France, Germany, Italy and Spain, murders have fallen by 30% to more than 50% since the late 1990s. Italy’s annual murder tally has fallen from 1,917 in 1991 to 327 in 2024, giving it one of the lowest rates in the EU. France’s murder rate, similarly, was roughly 2.3 per 100,000 people in 1995. Even after a string of recent minor increases that have lifted the annual victim tally above 1,000 for the first time in two decades, the per capita rate remains about 1.4 per 100,000. Experts said France showed why falling overall crime rates remained largely invisible to the public: a rise in gang-related drug violence and increased reporting of sexual and domestic violence have grabbed headlines, eclipsing the long-term general decline. YouGov’s survey showed more people in France than not (44%) believed crime in their home country was worse than elsewhere, compared with only 27% of Germans and 11% of Danes – 37% of whom felt crime was lower in Denmark than in other countries. Asked about the prevalence of particular kinds of crime, respondents in Britain (60%) said they thought the UK was unique in suffering from a high rate of knife crime, compared with 40% of Germans and 24%-30% in the other countries surveyed. A majority of respondents (61%) in France, on the other hand, felt drug trafficking and distribution were more problematic than elsewhere, along with rioting and public disorder (42%, compared with between 7% and 21% in other countries). Respondents in Spain (56%) and Italy were (46%) were particularly likely to say corruption was more of a problem in their countries than elsewhere, against just 7% in Denmark, where financial and economic crime was seen as the most common. Italians were also the most likely (41%) to think their country – home to groups including the Neapolitan Camorra and the Calabrian ‘Ndrangheta – had a specific problem with organised crime, compared with 16-32% in other nations. Germans, meanwhile, felt drug trafficking and gang violence (23-25%) were less of a problem for them than elsewhere.

Oil prices fall after peace deal signed – as it happened

We’re about to close this page but will resume our live coverage of the latest in the Middle East crisis on a fresh blog later in the day. You can see a full report here, and below is a recap of the latest key events on another eventful day. Donald Trump and Iranian president Masoud Pezeshkian both digitally signed the memorandum of understanding in English and Farsi aimed at ending the war with Iran, ‌US and Iranian officials said. Iran’s foreign ministry said the agreement was already in effect as of Wednesday, as did mediator Pakistan. The deal calls for an immediate and permanent halt to military operations on all fronts, includes Lebanon. It commits both sides and their allies to cease hostilities and refrain from the threat or use of force against each other, though Israel retains the right to strike back if Hezbollah attacks. Washington and Iran have 60 days to reach a final deal to be endorsed by a binding UN security council resolution. Senior US officials said the administration would know within “days or weeks, not months” if Iran was stalling – and was prepared to tighten economic pressure significantly if talks broke down. Trump threatened to resume attacks and kill Iranian officials if Tehran failed to honour its commitments. “We’re going to bomb the hell out of them if they violate the agreement,” Trump said of Iran. “I don’t want them to. I want them to honour the agreement.” The memorandum reportedly includes the full resumption of maritime traffic “with no charge” in the strait of Hormuz, the lifting of a US blockade of Iranian ports, the waiving of US sanctions on Iran, the unfreezing of its assets, and a $300bn investment fund for Iran’s post-war reconstruction Under the agreement Iran also undertakes not to build nuclear weapons, reaffirming a vow it had made for decades. It also agreed to an on-site “down-blending” of its stockpile of enriched uranium. Lead Iranian negotiator Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf said the Hormuz strait “will not return to prewar conditions” and that Iran would charge ships to transit the waterway – which Trump has opposed– after the 60-day toll-free period stipulated in the agreement. Oil prices fell again on prospects for the reopening of the Hormuz strait, with Brent crude futures below $80 at Wednesday – their lowest level since the war’s start – but later regaining more than 1% after Trump threatened renewed violence.

Donald Trump’s Iran deal met with anger, relief and incredulity

Pakistan’s prime minister has hailed the “peaceful resolution” of the conflict between the US and Iran, while congratulating the leadership of both countries for signing an agreement that he claimed would immediately reopen of the strait of Hormuz. But amid the celebrations from Shehbaz Sharif – who has served as mediator for the deal – the release of the memorandum of understanding (MOU) that gets the ball rolling on the next 60 days of negotiations between Iran and the US, has proven more divisive, eliciting a mixture of outrage, bewilderment, and relief. In France, the leaders of the G7 countries welcomed the deal, calling it a “historic opportunity to prevent Iran from acquiring any nuclear weapon.” European leaders have largely been sidelined from the negotiations, but expressed relief that the strait of Hormuz would reopen, allowing the flow of oil to resume. Emmanuel Macron said it would put a stop to a “situation of great instability that had terrible consequences for our economies”. In Israel, however, the agreement has been greeted with less optimism. Mark Regev, a former senior adviser to prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu, questioned how seriously Iran would approach negotiations over its nuclear program, now that America has removed the economic and military “pressure”. Under the terms of the MOU, Iran will reopen the strait of Hormuz, and in return receive waivers for US sanctions on crude oil exports, petroleum products and associated banking services. They will then enter into negotiations over the fate of their nuclear program and stock of highly enriched uranium. “The straits are open and the Iranians can start exporting their oil, and therefore they get money coming in, you’ve taken away the economic pressure,” said Regev, adding “maybe Trump will get a great deal … but at the moment I don’t see that. I see America having given Iran’s regime a return to life.” Regev’s views were reflected across Israel. Yair Lapid, the leader of Israel’s opposition, said on Tuesday, “Netanyahu promised us a historic victory – and we got a crisis with the Americans, Hormuz open to the Iranians, money for the Revolutionary Guards, ballistic missiles aimed at Israel, and Israel waiting in the corridor like a scolded child.” With Israel set to hold elections before October, Lapid and his coalition partner Naftali Bennet, are seeking to capitalise on the anger brewing in Israel over the agreement between the US and Iran. Trump, who has previously enjoyed high approval among Israelis, is facing widespread criticism in local media. David Horovitz, the founding editor of the Times of Israel, wrote on Wednesday that the US-Israel war on Iran was lost due to “US presidential weakness”, among other issues. “It will come back to bite America. It leaves Israel more vulnerable than before the war began, with a new US-Iran ceasefire agreement that aims to deny Israel the freedom to protect and defend itself,” he wrote. Netanyahu’s Likud party, apparently aware of the cooling views on the US president, has reportedly scrapped plans to highlight the prime minister’s close ties with Trump in its upcoming election campaign. Not all voices were speaking in opposition to the agreement though; Danny Citrinowicz, a former head of the Iran branch of Israeli military intelligence, said the deal showed reality had “finally returned to US policy on Iran”. “Before events spiraled completely out of control, the US administration stepped back from maximalist objectives and returned to a more measured and realistic approach,” Citrinowicz wrote on Wednesday. Those same splits in opinion were reflected in the US. The Republican senator Lindsey Graham, a key Trump ally, appeared to soften his view of the MOU after a “very lengthy and productive” conversation with the US special envoy Steve Witkoff. “After this discussion, it is my opinion that signing the MOU will be beneficial to the United States, in as much as the strait of Hormuz will begin to open, and the hostilities with Iran will stop,” Graham wrote on social media. “Whether or not the United States can reach an acceptable, verifiable deal with Iran regarding its nuclear program and other issues is yet to be determined, but I see little downside to trying.” A handful of other Senate Republicans were more critical in their views. Bill Cassidy, who Trump failed to back in a tightly fought primary last month, said “Iran’s nuclear ambitions were not curbed, and they have learned that threatening the strait of Hormuz works and will undoubtedly leverage it in the future.” Senator Ted Cruz, who has backed the war, said the president was getting “very poor advice when it comes to this deal”. Susan Rice, a former official in the Obama and Biden administrations was more blunt in her assessment, calling it “the biggest national security blunder in decades”, while Democratic Senator Adam Schiff said it was “hard to imagine a more thorough capitulation.” “Iran gets sanctions relief, the release of frozen funds, the ability to export oil, and a $300 billion reconstruction fund. The U.S. gets a reiteration of the vague promise Iran won’t develop a nuke.” Trump himself hailed the agreement as a “major win” for the United States, while Iran’s chief negotiator, Mohammad Ghalibaf called it “a record of US failure”. Trump signed the agreement on Wednesday and soon after, Iran announced that its president, Masoud Pezeshkian, has also signed it in Tehran. Trump signed during a dinner with Macron at the palace of Versailles, the site of the 1919 agreement which formally ended the conflict between Germany and allied powers after the first world war. The outcomes of that agreement were short lived, and Europe was again consumed by war just 20 years after it was signed.

Ukraine war briefing: Allies give nod for Kyiv to reproduce their air-defence missiles

European G7 countries and the US are prepared to license Ukraine-based companies to build long-range missiles and air defence systems that are only made elsewhere and supplied to the Ukrainian military from dwindling stocks. The German chancellor, Friedrich Merz, said: “We are all currently producing too little, and this can be offset by granting licences to companies that have these production capabilities, including European and Ukrainian firms.” An overnight G7 statement pledged to “increase the delivery of air defence capacities, additional systems and interceptors, and long-range capabilities” to Kyiv, and to consider licences to boost Ukraine’s domestic military production. US companies in particular would be able to grant licences for this purpose to European manufacturers, Merz said, adding he was “grateful” to Donald Trump “for this great willingness to cooperate”. A diplomatic source said: “We are going to produce under licence not only air defence systems, but also deep-strike capabilities.” Ukraine has its own extensive anti-drone capabilities but has been facing dire shortages of the interceptor missiles needed to stop cruise and ballistic missiles. G7 leaders on Wednesday hailed a newly found unity on increasing the pressure on Russia to end its war against Ukraine, sensing a shift by Donald Trump. “It was tough work but worth it,” said the German chancellor, Friedrich Merz, describing as a “success” the leaders’ agreed final statement involving key geopolitical issues including Ukraine and Russia. At last year’s G7, Trump walked out early and no statement was issued. Patrick Wintour writes that Emmanuel Macron, the French president, hailed a “very deep change in the US approach”. “President Trump, like all of us, simply acknowledged that there was no serious willingness on Russia’s part today to discuss peace,” he said. Macron repeatedly emphasised a “shared commitment to making progress on this issue”, which he described as “a very profound shift and remobilisation of the G7”. Trump in his final news conference hailed his talks with Volodymyr Zelenskyy in Evian and a recent phone conversation with Vladimir Putin. “They both want to do something, they just don’t know how to do it,” said Trump, who referred to Russia as the “offensive” party in the war and said they were losing the most troops. A pioneering programme launched in May demonstrates how Taiwan’s civil defence movement is drawing lessons from Ukraine, Yu-chen Li writes from Taipei. The course in how to fly drones has emerged as part of a broader effort to improve drone literacy among the public in Taiwan, a self-ruled democracy that faces a growing military threat from China. Volodymyr Zelenskyy is due to join EU leaders at a summit in Brussels on Thursday. An EU official has revealed preliminary diplomatic contacts between the office of the EU chief, António Costa, and the Kremlin. Costa meanwhile “has been coordinating closely with European leaders on possible engagement with Russia and the issues to be discussed when the right moment comes … The EU is not a mediator. It supports Ukraine in its efforts to achieve a just and lasting peace.” Giorgia ⁠Meloni, the Italian prime minister, called for ⁠a single European ⁠Union envoy from a “medium-sized power” to handle contacts with Russia over Ukraine. Meloni said that a proliferation of diplomatic groups within Europe risked creating confusion. “It would be very difficult to put forward someone from one of the largest European ⁠countries,” she said, adding: Ukraine is seeking an additional $20bn ⁠in military funding from its allies, said the defence minister, Mykhailo Fedorov. A Ukrainian defence source has told Reuters that Ukraine will make the request on ⁠Thursday at a meeting of the Ukraine defence contact group, an alliance of more than 50 ⁠countries also known as the Ramstein group. The EU plans to allow Ukrainian refugees to stay in the bloc for another year but likely exceptions could include men of military age, Ursula von der Leyen, European Commission president, said. It was not immediately clear if any such limitation would apply only to new arrivals or also to men already living in the EU. Russia accused Ukraine ⁠of conducting a drone strike on a bus carrying Belarusian schoolchildren on Wednesday – an allegation that Ukraine’s military said was false. Russia’s foreign ministry said a woman accompanying the children had been killed and eight others including six children had been injured. The ‌Ukrainian military’s general staff ‌said: “During the specified period, the defence forces of Ukraine ‌did not employ unmanned aerial vehicles against targets in Bryansk oblast.” Reuters was unable to verify the report. Both sides in the war deny targeting civilians. Hungary is investigating its tax authority, counter-terrorism forces and other agencies over the ⁠seizure of a ⁠routine Ukrainian bank cash transport under the previous, Russia-friendly government of Viktor Orbán. Hungary quickly returned the $82m in cash and gold to Ukraine after Orban lost national elections to Péter Magyar.

Inspired by Ukraine, and worried by China: Taiwan teaches its citizens how to fly drones

In a small, crowded room in Taipei, Pan Chien-chin is trying to keep a drone hovering steadily. Imagining himself flying a plane, he gently nudges controller joysticks to guide the insect-like device as it hums through the air. Cheers break out as Pan, who has never flown a drone before, steers it around a rectangular course marked by traffic cones without crashing. Around him are about two dozen fellow trainees, all signed up for the same course: Taiwan’s first civil defence drone training programme. “The war in Ukraine has really changed how drones are used,” says Pan, 48, a food company worker. “It’s like giving myself another skill, something I can use if it’s ever needed one day,” he adds. The pioneering programme, launched in May, is another sign of Taiwan’s civil defence movement drawing lessons from Ukraine, where drones have played an increasingly critical role in pushing back the Russian invasion since 2022. Taiwan has seen an island-wide boom in emergency rescue and first aid training in recent years, with more than 30 local, volunteer-led civil defence groups now active. Tang Tsung-yi, a spokesperson at Kuma Academy, the civil defence NGO that runs the training, says the course helps beginner drone pilots understand the capabilities of drones on the battlefield. The course has emerged as part of a broader effort to improve drone literacy among the public in Taiwan, a self-ruled democracy that faces a growing military threat from China. The number of registered drones in Taiwan surpassed 39,000 in December, according to Taiwan’s Civil Aviation Administration, which lowered the minimum age for drone registration to 14 in 2024. Some high schools in Taipei have started holding summer camps to teach students how to assemble drones from scratch and use them for search-and-rescue operations. Sessions at Kuma Academy’s drone piloting course have sold out through August; about 75 people can be trained each month. On the Saturday afternoon Pan attended his first class, he was joined by a diverse group: two teenagers, and adults ranging from their 30s to their 60s. More than half were women. Karren Wang, a 65-year-old retiree, says that flying drones could be one of her best ways to contribute in a crisis given her age. Speaking after the class, she rated her first attempt at drone piloting “not too bad”, thanks to a supportive atmosphere in the group. “Even if you crashed terribly, they would still say: ‘Great job’,” she says. The five participants who spoke to the Guardian had all taken part in other training run by local civil defence groups, including first aid and casualty evacuation. With drone training added to the toolkit, civil defence groups are moving into a field seen as increasingly important to Taiwan’s security. In a Chinese invasion scenario, unmanned systems could be particularly useful for frontline surveillance across the island’s mountainous terrain. In Ukraine, drone pilots fly thousands of attack missions each day. Military officials estimate drones account for 60% of Russians killed and wounded. The main goal of the course is not to arm civilians, Tang says, but people can “move from passive defence like sheltering to a more active role in observing risks and sharing information”. “I may not be a soldier, but if [a China invasion] ever happened here, as a citizen, I’d like to have the ability to help in some way,” says one participant, who asked to remain anonymous because they work at a defence company with links to the government. Lighter than 100 grams, the drones in the class are entirely Taiwanese-made, with no GPS or self-driving technology. The reason is simple: operators need to learn how to fly by sight and manual reflexes in modern warfare, as automated commercial drones may fail due to electronic jamming. The choice also aligns with Taiwan’s recent efforts to build a “China-free” global supply chain for unmanned aerial vehicles. However, a special defence budget recently passed by the opposition-dominated legislature stripped out funding for domestic drone production. Taiwan produces some weapons domestically but remains heavily reliant on US arms sales for major defence systems. Donald Trump has yet to sign a $14bn arms package for the island after meeting Chinese leader Xi Jinping in Beijing last month. For Taiwanese citizens like Pan, domestic political divisions and growing uncertainty over US-Taiwan relations reinforce their desire to take part in civil defence activities. “We can’t change the broader environment, so the only thing we can do is prepare ourselves as best we can,” Pan says.

Trump signs Iran peace plan, claiming deal averts ‘worldwide depression’

Donald Trump has signed a 14-point agreement with Iran, claiming it delivered a “major win” for the United States – even as it made significant political and financial concessions to Iran to reopen the strait of Hormuz and prevent a “worldwide depression”. In extraordinary remarks on Wednesday, Donald Trump went from threatening Iran with a new wave of attacks to suggesting the country had basic rights to enrich uranium for civilian use, that he would not pressure Tehran to abandon its ballistic missiles programme and the US was “going to have to give back” billions of dollars in frozen Iranian assets. Those remarks, as well as the full text of the agreement – which was hailed by the Hezbollah chief, Naim Qassem, as a “great victory” – are likely to fuel anger in Israel and among hardliners in the Republican party who had urged Trump not to make a deal with Tehran. Iran’s president, Masoud Pezeshkian, signed the agreement on Wednesday from Tehran. The US vice-president, JD Vance, is also expected to sign the deal at a more formal ceremony in Geneva on Friday. Iran’s chief negotiator, Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, said: “The agreement is a record of US failure. People will see it and judge.” Defending the deal, Trump said no US president had ever been as tough on Iran as him, and “there is nothing as smart as the market – and the market loves it”. Trump said that “the alternative would be a worldwide depression”, arguing that if he had not struck a deal, “the strait [of Hormuz] would never have been opened. They don’t like floating billion-dollar ships up and down the strait when their rockets are flying overhead and there are mines all over the place.” Senior administration officials said the deal would help prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon, pointing to an agreement to discuss down-blending its 440kg stockpile of highly enriched uranium, which could be further enriched for use in a nuclear weapon. Trump has said he was open to the stockpile being diluted inside Iran under the supervision of the International Atomic Energy Agency. The Trump administration had delayed the release of the full text of the memorandum of understanding, which is essentially a 60-day ceasefire agreement, in order to hold more comprehensive nuclear and permanent peace talks with Iran. The 14-point plan was dictated to journalists during a background briefing by senior administration officials as Trump spoke at the end of the G7. The deal would provide important financial incentives to Iran, including the immediate lifting of a US naval blockade on Iranian ports and the issuance of waivers for Iranian crude oil to be shipped abroad, as well as the potential lifting of all international sanctions against Iran, the unfreezing of billions of dollars in Iranian assets, and plans to develop a $300bn (£224bn) reconstruction fund for Iran funded by regional partners in the Gulf. Trump angrily rejected suggestions that the US would be contributing to the $300bn fund, instead saying payouts by Gulf states were likely to be conditional on Iran’s good behaviour. “Anyone who wants to can invest. What do you expect me to say: no one is allowed to invest? But we’re not investing; we’re not putting up even 10 cents,” he said. The ceasefire deal included Lebanon, a key Iranian demand, which would restrain Israel from conducting military operations in the country, according to a senior administration official. It also included a clause ensuring the “territorial integrity” of Lebanon, although an administration official when asked did not confirm that meant Israel would be forced to withdraw from the swathe of the country it has occupied as a “buffer zone” against Hezbollah. In return, Iran would agree to restrain its foreign allies including Hezbollah in Lebanon, and “reaffirms that it shall not procure or develop nuclear weapons”. The agreement would also allow the toll-free passage of ships for 60 days through the strait of Hormuz, but on Wednesday Ghalibaf said Iran would charge ships travelling through the waterway at the end of the period stipulated in the memorandum of understanding. In an interview aired on state television, Ghalibaf said the “strait of Hormuz will not return to prewar conditions”, adding: “Iran has the right to sovereignty over the strait of Hormuz and of course we will receive a fee for services.” Suzanne Maloney, the vice-president and director of the Foreign Policy program at the Brookings Institution, said: “Realistically, the level of expertise and detail that is required to hammer out even the nuclear piece of this seems overwhelming for an administration that is flying by the seat of his pants in these negotiations. “So much is front loaded for the Iranians … they’re going to be able to export oil without the sanctions regime, which is almost surreal at this point in time. They’re going to make an awful lot of money very quickly.” Trump backed a G7 leaders’ joint statement that welcomed the deal but said a follow-on agreement was necessary to rein in Iran’s ballistic missile programme, an issue not directly addressed in the memorandum of understanding. “They have to have some, because other people have some. You got to have some,” Trump said. “What am I going to do? Am I going to let Saudi Arabia have missiles, but they can’t have them?” he added, referring to previous discussions with advisers on Iran’s missile arsenal. France’s president, Emmanuel Macron, called it a “very good deal”, adding that US allies in the G7 support it “because it’s an agreement that puts a stop to a situation of great instability that had terrible consequences for our economies”. But the G7 proposal for further talks involving European leaders about Iran’s ballistic missiles and support for proxy forces is certain to be rejected by Iran. Tehran has been negotiating exclusively with the US and regards Europe as largely irrelevant. Iran is also likely to reject France and Britain’s plan for a taskforce to escort ships through the strait, a proposal endorsed in the G7 leaders’ statement. The G7 leaders said the agreement provided “a historic opportunity to prevent Iran from acquiring any nuclear weapon and tackling the threats related to its regional and ballistic activities. We support and are ready to contribute to its implementation.” Trump also sounded a conciliatory note on returning frozen assets to Iran, a stipulation of the Obama administration’s Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action that he had attacked in 2015. “We have taken a lot of their money,” Trump told reporters. “It’s not our money, it’s their money, and we froze it at a certain point in time. I guess we’re going to have to give it back, you know, if we didn’t give it back, nobody would ever invest in the dollar again.” Trump claimed the price of a barrel of oil had fallen to $72 – Brent crude dipped below $80 on Tuesday – and would soon fall below the level it had been at before the war.

Trump’s Iran deal is result of unrealistic ambitions for an untenable war

As the adage goes: no plan of battle survives first contact with the enemy. Donald Trump entered the war with Iran with maximalist goals: eliminating the country’s nuclear programme, destroying its ballistic missile programme and ending its support for regional military groups including Hezbollah and Hamas. He exits it with Iran’s word not to build a bomb and to hold further nuclear discussions, no mention in writing of the ballistic missile programme and with Hezbollah celebrating a “victory” as the memorandum of understanding (MOU) instituted a ceasefire in Lebanon, where Israel has seized a swath of the country as a “buffer zone”. Iran’s key asset ended up being the strait of Hormuz, the waterway that almost every previous simulation of the war predicated would be quickly cut off by Iran. To reopen the strait, the administration was forced to fold on its broader goals or face what Trump called a “worldwide depression”. Barbara Leaf, a distinguished diplomatic fellow at the Middle East Institute and a former US assistant secretary of state for near eastern affairs, said the US had started the war with “disastrously unrealistic assessments of the regime’s resilience”, as well as Iran’s readiness to seize the strait of Hormuz and attack US and foreign facilities in the Gulf. “The US rapidly found that overmatching an adversary that has spent four decades honing its asymmetrical warfighting doctrine and skills would not be the war it had prepared for,” she said. “And the rapid escalation of economic pain globally that eventually came to American consumers made the war all the more untenable.” Now, she added, Trump faced a conundrum: “He doesn’t want to go back to warfighting. But he’s tossed away so much of the leverage he might have had if the war had ended in the first or second week.” It has been clear for days that the Trump administration was skittish about putting out the text of its MOU. It was only finally read out by a senior administration official on a briefing call on Wednesday, and the White House still has not published a copy online. The reasoning is clear: many in Trump’s own party will hate this deal. The outgoing US senator Bill Cassidy, of Louisiana, called it the “worst foreign policy blunder in decades”. “Reagan is rolling over in his grave,” he wrote. “Iran’s nuclear ambitions were not curbed, and they have learned that threatening the strait of Hormuz works and will undoubtedly leverage it in the future. Now, Iran gets to build brand-new infrastructure under this deal.” Thom Tillis, Republican senator for North Carolina, said the 14 points published on Wednesday were “not sufficient for me to say it’s a good deal”. Trump has for years attacked the Obama-era joint comprehensive plan of action (JCPOA), saying that the former president had sent over “pallets of cash” to bribe Iran into not making a bomb. But when it came time for Trump to make his own peace with Iran, he found himself justifying the potential turnover of a far larger set of assets – as well as other financial incentives, backing a ceasefire in Lebanon between Israel and Hezbollah, and allowing Iran and Oman to discuss the future of the strait. “It’s not our money, it’s their money, and we froze it at a certain point in time,” Trump said of the frozen Iranian assets. “I guess we’re going to have to give it back.” At moments on Wednesday, it almost seemed that Trump was echoing Iranian talking points, saying that if US ally Saudi Arabia has ballistic missiles then Iran had a point that it should too. As to the potential for Iran’s uranium enrichment, he said: “It’s a little hard when other people have it, other adjoining states have it, and you’re not letting them have it for purposes of electricity and things like that. You have to use a little common sense.” The MOU was ultimately a pragmatic decision by the Trump administration that the conflict must end as quickly as possible despite the political cost. Leaf said she was “deeply relieved that this ill-conceived war appears to be ending”, but added that there was “little to ensure that the administration won’t find itself slipping back into conflict”. Robert Malley, a former state department official and negotiator on the JCPOA , wrote that there is not much value in comparing the two agreements, which were “fundamentally different agreements that emerged from starkly different contexts”. “The bottom line is that the MOU is far preferable to any of the alternatives on offer,” he wrote. “Period.”