"Nuclear, Missiles, Hezbollah All Undecided": Doubts Raised Over US-Iran MOU

With the full text of the 14-point memorandum of understanding (MOU) to end the war signed by the United States and Iran on June 17, local time, being made public, the international community's attention is focusing on the "details."

Major foreign media outlets pointed out that while the agreement will immediately halt the war, it has pushed most of the core issues—such as stopping Iran's nuclear development, controlling proxy forces, lifting sanctions, and reopening the Strait of Hormuz—to future negotiations.

Issues regarding proxy forces like Hezbollah and the Houthis, as well as regulations on Iran's missile program—which U.S. President Donald Trump had initially cited as justifications for the war—were virtually omitted entirely from the agreement.

The British BBC pointed out, "While the cessation of hostilities under the MOU also applies to Hezbollah, the group itself was not even mentioned in the agreement."

Furthermore, regarding Iran's possession of ballistic missiles, President Trump hinted at a flexible approach, saying, "If other countries have them, it's a little unfair that Iran can't have a few."

Article 8 of the agreement states that "Iran reaffirms that it will not acquire or develop nuclear weapons," but critics say this is a declarative and vague phrasing that merely reiterates Iran's past foreign policy stance.

Iran made similar statements when ratifying the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) in 1970, and in the preamble of the 2015 Iran nuclear deal (Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, or JCPOA) under the Obama administration.

The New York Times (NYT) pointed out, "As the word 'reaffirm' suggests, Iran's promise to never seek or acquire nuclear weapons is nothing new."

Articles 4 and 5 of the agreement specify that the U.S. will lift its maritime blockade of Iran immediately upon signing, and Iran will restore transit through the Strait of Hormuz to pre-war levels within 30 days.

To reopen the Strait of Hormuz, clearing sea mines that may have been laid in the strait is key, but experts believe it could take several months to complete the mine-clearing operations.

Because of this, vessels such as oil tankers may be reluctant to pass through the strait until the mines are cleared and transit safety is fully guaranteed.

Steven Wills, a naval expert at the Center for Maritime Strategy, a U.S. think tank, told the U.S. political outlet The Hill, "Mines are unseen, hard to find, and create a level of fear unlike other weapons," adding, "It's going to take some time to figure out."

Interpretations also diverge regarding the clauses mentioning Lebanon.

Article 1 of the agreement declares an immediate and permanent end to military operations on all fronts, including Lebanon, and promises to guarantee Lebanon's territorial integrity and sovereignty.

However, even after this agreement to end the war, Israel has not stopped its attacks targeting Hezbollah, the pro-Iranian armed group in Lebanon.

Furthermore, Israel has invaded and is occupying Lebanese territory under the military goal of creating a "buffer zone" in southern Lebanon to prevent Hamas from attacking its territory.

When asked if the "guarantee of territorial integrity" means Israel must forcibly withdraw from large parts of Lebanese territory it has occupied as a "buffer zone" against Hezbollah, a U.S. administration official did not give a definitive answer, the British Guardian reported.

The establishment of a $300 billion (approx. 457 trillion won) reconstruction fund, outlined in Article 6 of the agreement, also carries high future uncertainty as it remains undecided who will actually provide the money.

The agreement only states that they "commit to working with regional partners to establish a definitive and mutually agreed plan."

Regarding this fund, President Trump asserted, "We're not going to invest, and we're not putting up 10 cents."

When asked if he is asking Middle Eastern allies to participate in the fund, he said, "No," but left the possibility open, adding, "If those countries invest, that's fine."

U.S. CNN explained, "The $300 billion that Trump said would come from Middle Eastern nations appears to be separate from the funds Iran could raise through oil sales, but no specific details were provided at all."

Concerns are also being raised that the 60-day negotiation deadline is too tight.

Article 3 of the agreement specifies that the U.S. and Iran "commit to negotiating and achieving a final agreement within a maximum of 60 days, which can be extended by mutual consent."

However, former U.S. President Barack Obama's 2015 Iran nuclear deal took 20 months to reach an agreement.

The British Telegraph pointed out, "Two months is an ambitious timeframe to conclude an agreement."

The NYT also reported that 60 days is a "very short timeline," adding that "U.S. officials are quietly acknowledging that, compared to past long-term negotiations with Iran, they might not be able to reach a final agreement within this period."

Indeed, regarding the 60 days of follow-up negotiations, President Trump indicated that the deadline could be applied flexibly, saying he does not view the 60 days as a "hard deadline" as long as "they behave."
※ Please note: This article was translated by AI and may contain errors.