'No Giveaways to Iran!' 'What Is This?' Reporters Grill Trump as US-Iran MOU Dissected

On June 17, local time, as the full text of the 14-clause memorandum of understanding (MOU) to end the war signed by the United States and Iran was disclosed, international attention is focusing on the "details."

Major foreign media outlets pointed out that while the agreement will immediately halt the war, it leaves most key issues—such as deterring Iran's nuclear development, controlling proxy forces, lifting sanctions, and reopening the Strait of Hormuz—as tasks for future negotiations.

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

The British broadcaster BBC pointed out, "While the cessation of hostilities under the MOU applies to Hezbollah, the group itself is 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 evaluate this as a declarative and vague phrase that merely reiterates Iran's past external positions.

Iran made similar statements upon 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 never to 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.

Reopening the Strait of Hormuz hinges on clearing sea mines that may have been laid in the strait, a task experts believe could take several months to complete.

Consequently, vessels such as oil tankers may hesitate to transit the strait until the mines are cleared and safe passage 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 anonymous, difficult to find, and create a level of fear unlike other weapons. It will take quite some time to figure out."

Interpretations also diverge over the clause 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 peace agreement, Israel has not stopped its attacks targeting Hezbollah, the pro-Iran armed group in Lebanon.

Furthermore, Israel has invaded and is occupying Lebanese territory under the military objective of establishing a "buffer zone" in southern Lebanon to prevent Hamas from launching attacks against its territory.

When asked whether "guaranteeing territorial integrity" means Israel must forcibly withdraw from a significant portion of Lebanese territory it occupies as a "buffer zone" against Hezbollah, a U.S. administration official declined to give a definitive answer, the British newspaper The 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 foot the bill.

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

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

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

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

Concerns are also being raised that the 60-day negotiation timeline 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, extendable by mutual consent."

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

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

The NYT also described the 60 days as a "very short timeline," reporting that "U.S. officials quietly acknowledge that, compared to past long-term negotiations with Iran, they might not reach a final agreement within this period."

Indeed, regarding the 60-day follow-up negotiations, President Trump indicated that the deadline could be applied flexibly, stating that he does not view the 60 days as a "hard deadline" as long as "they behave properly."

(Reported by JIN Sang-myeong | Video by Ahn Jun-hyeok | Produced by SBS Digital News)
※ Please note: This article was translated by AI and may contain errors.