KOR
▲ U.S. President Donald Trump
Although the full text of the end-of-war memorandum of understanding (MOU) between the United States and Iran, which had been shrouded in secrecy, was released by the Donald Trump administration on June 17 (local time), several clauses are expected to spark intense controversy.
The MOU, disclosed by a senior U.S. official during a phone briefing on the same day, consists of 14 articles in total.
Among them, Article 5, which outlines Iran's measures regarding the Strait of Hormuz, including transit fees, mine clearance, and future management systems, is highly likely to be at the center of the controversy.
The article, consisting of three sentences, states, "Upon the signing of this MOU, Iran will do its utmost to prepare so that merchant vessels traveling from the Persian Gulf to the Gulf of Oman, or vice versa, can safely transit without any charge for only 60 days."
The problematic phrase here is "with no charge for 60 days only."
This is because it can be interpreted to mean that once the 60-day negotiation period for a "final agreement" to end the war between the U.S. and Iran concludes after signing the MOU, Iran could collect fees from civilian vessels transiting the Strait of Hormuz.
By limiting toll-free transit through the strait to 60 days, it leaves room for Iran to impose transit-like fees under any pretext in the future.
Additionally, another sentence in Article 5 states, "Iran will engage in dialogue with Oman to define the future management and maritime services of the Strait of Hormuz."
Iran has previously stated that while it would not charge a "toll" in the Strait of Hormuz, it would collect fees to cover the costs of providing "maritime services" for safe transit, as Iran and Oman share the strait as their territorial waters.
Ultimately, this content can be interpreted as contradicting President Trump's previous assertions that the Strait of Hormuz would be completely open and free of any tolls.
With the midterm elections approaching in November, President Trump could face criticism for rushing into an agreement favorable to Iran in an attempt to quell rising public discontent in the U.S. caused by soaring energy prices.
Discontent is also expected to grow among other nations that procure energy, such as oil and gas, through the Strait of Hormuz.
This is because a financial burden that did not exist before could be newly created due to the war triggered by U.S. and Israeli attacks on Iran, and this cost could be factored into energy shipping rates, potentially driving up oil prices.
The contents of Articles 4, 10, and 11, which state that the U.S. will begin lifting various military and economic pressure measures against Iran immediately upon the signing of the MOU, could also draw backlash from hardliners against Iran within the U.S.
Article 4 states that the U.S. military will immediately begin lifting its blockade of the Iranian strait, which has been in place since April 13, and complete it within 30 days. The New York Times (NYT) evaluated this as "a critical and immediate victory for Iran, which sends the vast majority of its exports to China."
The NYT also pointed out, "While Iran's immediate economic crisis will be eased once revenues begin to flow again, the U.S. will lose critical leverage in nuclear negotiations, meaning Iran could have an incentive to drag its feet and extend the 60-day negotiations into months or years."
In addition, Article 10 commits the U.S. Department of the Treasury to granting sanctions waivers for the export of Iranian crude oil, petroleum, and petrochemical products, as well as related services such as banking transactions, insurance, and shipping. Article 11 promises that the U.S. will issue all licenses and approvals to allow Iran immediate access to its frozen assets.
The NYT noted that these articles could also raise concerns among hardliners against Iran, pointing out that Iranian military officials or entities designated as terrorists or subject to sanctions could benefit from the frozen assets even before a "final agreement" is reached in the nuclear negotiations.
Article 6, which states that the U.S. will commit, along with other Middle Eastern nations, to a final and mutually agreed plan worth at least $300 billion (approximately 465.3 trillion won) for Iran's reconstruction and economic development, is also a subject of controversy.
Although President Trump and Vice President JD Vance have emphasized that the U.S. will not contribute a single penny to this $300 billion, it is ultimately a massive financial support package for Iran, shifts the burden to other countries, and strongly resembles the "war reparations" that Iran has consistently demanded.
Furthermore, Article 1, in which the U.S. and Iran declare an immediate and permanent end to the war on all fronts, includes "Lebanon" as one of the fronts where the war will end, which could draw complaints from Israel, which initiated the war alongside the U.S.
The NYT noted, "This is a significant dismissal by the U.S. of Israel's concerns regarding the threat from the Lebanon-based, pro-Iranian militant group Hezbollah."
(Photo: AP, Yonhap News)
※ Please note: This article was translated by AI and may contain errors.
