Iran International
US President Donald Trump is defending the newly signed US-Iran Memorandum of Understanding as a diplomatic victory, insisting Iran has been weakened by months of conflict and entered negotiations out of desperation.
But some Iran experts argue the agreement risks delivering significant concessions to Tehran while leaving key disputes unresolved.
David Schenker, former US Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs, told Eye for Iran he was surprised by the scope of benefits Iran could receive under the agreement.
"I don't feel good about it," Schenker said.
The MOU outlines a 60-day negotiation period during which the future of Iran's nuclear program, sanctions relief, frozen Iranian assets, reconstruction funding and the administration of the Strait of Hormuz will be discussed.
According to Schenker, the agreement effectively gives Tehran major economic benefits upfront while postponing the most difficult negotiations.
"In the meanwhile, it's a tremendous win for Iran," he said.
Lebanon's role in the deal
One of the most controversial aspects of the agreement centers on Lebanon.
Earlier this month, Iran launched direct missile attacks on Israel after Israeli strikes targeted Hezbollah positions in Beirut's southern suburbs. The exchange marked a significant shift in Tehran's approach.
For decades, Iran largely relied on proxy groups such as Hezbollah and Hamas to confront Israel. This time, Iranian officials openly linked attacks on Hezbollah to direct Iranian retaliation against Israel. Many Iran experts warned the Trump administration against tying Lebanon to the Iran conflict.
Iranian leaders subsequently insisted that any broader ceasefire arrangement must also address Lebanon.
Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi warned that negotiations could not move forward unless fighting in Lebanon ended, while other Iranian officials described Lebanon as being at the "forefront" of discussions with Washington.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu rejected what he described as Iran's attempt to impose a "new equation" in which attacks on Hezbollah would trigger direct Iranian military action.
Schenker believes elements of that equation may now be reflected in the MOU.
"I think first and foremost it suggests that the administration wanted a deal more than Iran, so it was willing to make concessions," he said.
According to Schenker, the agreement risks strengthening Iran's regional influence despite the military setbacks it suffered during the conflict.
"They're going to point to this and say, 'Look, Iran and Hezbollah protected Lebanon,'" he said.
He argued that such a narrative could undermine Lebanon's elected government while boosting Iran's standing among Hezbollah supporters.
For Schenker, the precedent may prove as significant as any sanctions relief.
"If Iran can insulate not only Hezbollah but also its other regional partners from retaliation, it strengthens this proxy network across the region," he said.
Concerns over sanctions relief
Schenker also questioned provisions that could lead to the lifting of oil sanctions and the release of frozen Iranian assets.
"They're doing the lifting of the oil sanctions upfront," he said, warning that the move could provide billions of dollars in revenue to Tehran.
The former diplomat said several of the original objectives Washington and Israel cited at the outset of the conflict appear absent from the current framework, including limits on Iran's ballistic missile program and support for regional proxy groups.
He also raised concerns over language that could eventually allow Iran to collect fees related to maritime traffic through the Strait of Hormuz.
"It's something out of a mafia movie," Schenker said. "Iran is offering protection and will shake down international shipping."
The Iranian perspective
While much of the debate surrounding the MOU has focused on geopolitics, oil markets and regional security, some opponents of the Islamic Republic are viewing the agreement through a different lens.
For human rights activist Gazelle Sharmahd, whose father Jamshid Sharmahd was abducted and later executed by Iranian authorities, the announcement felt deeply personal.
"Defeat," she said when asked how she reacted to news of the agreement.
"I think a lot of people feel betrayed."
Sharmahd said many Iranians had believed sustained military and economic pressure had brought the Islamic Republic to one of its weakest moments in decades.
"We had the regime on its knees," she said. "How do we go from there to giving this regime the resources, the power, the legitimacy to build up everything that we took away from them?"
She warned that sanctions relief and new funding could strengthen the state's ability to suppress dissent inside Iran.
"The execution wave will not go down," she said. "In history, we see it goes up when we appease this regime."
Message to Trump
Sharmahd reserved some of her strongest comments for Trump himself.
Speaking directly to the US president, she urged him not to abandon pressure on Tehran.
"Capitulation will not save us. It will be our end," she said.
"You have an army of Iranians. You have an army of American patriots. You have an army in the Middle East standing behind you."
She argued that any future agreement should prioritize the aspirations of ordinary Iranians rather than the interests of the government in Tehran.
"Speak to us," she said. "Not to this regime."
As negotiations move forward, the debate over the MOU is likely to intensify.
For supporters, the agreement offers a pathway away from another costly regional war. For critics, it risks rewarding Tehran while leaving unresolved many of the issues that helped trigger the conflict in the first place.
You can watch Eye for Iran on YouTube or Subscribe and listen on any podcast platform
Tehran’s unveiling of a towering statue depicting the Roman Emperor Valerian kneeling before pre-Islamic Persian King Shapur I has renewed criticism of the Islamic Republic’s appeal to nationalist sentiment following the June war with Israel.
For over forty years, the theocracy purged ancient Persian history from schoolbooks, replacing it with post-Islamic narratives. But after the 12-day conflict with Israel, officials have turned to the distant pre-Islamic past to rally a divided society.
From murals of ancient kings and soldiers to patriotic songs added to Shi’ite mourning ceremonies performed before Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, Tehran now embraces imagery once deemed heretical by its own revolutionary ethos.
'Kneel before Iran' campaign
Tehran’s Revolution (Enghelab) Square was the scene of an unusual spectacle on Friday as officials unveiled a massive bronze statue depicting Roman Emperor Valerian kneeling in submission before Sassanid King Shapur I, commemorating Iran’s victory at the Battle of Edessa (260 AD).
The event was held under the slogan “Kneel before Iran,” part of what authorities describe as a campaign to project “national unity and historical pride” following the June war with Israel.
Tehran Mayor Alireza Zakani, a staunch ultraconservative, said on X: “Enmity with Great Iran can only end in kneeling before this historic nation.”
Municipal official Davood Goodarzi said the installation would be accompanied by visual displays depicting “other victories of Iranians over foreign aggressors,” including the defeat of British forces by local commander Rais-Ali Delvari, Mirza Kuchak Khan’s resistance against Russian troops, and Surena’s triumph over Rome at the Battle of Carrhae in 53 BCE.
The goal, Goodarzi said, is “strengthening concepts such as national dignity, social unity, and Iranian identity.”
The statue, he said, would remain temporarily at Revolution Square before being moved to a city gateway “where it will stand as the first emblem of Iran before diplomats and foreign visitors.”
Unveiled women were allowed to attend the unveiling ceremony—an uncommon scene at events organized by Tehran’s ultra-hardline municipality.
The turn to the pre-Islamic past
The sharp reversal also recalls remarks once made by Khamenei. In a 2011 speech, he asserted that “all the great military victories of this nation came after Islam,” dismissing pre-Islamic accounts as “things that are not documented.”
In 1987, he had said that prophets triumphed over kings such as Cyrus and that “nothing remains of these monarchs in history but names remembered with derision.”
Nevertheless, pro-government social media accounts have now gone so far as to circulate posters equating Khamenei himself with Shapur, showing him standing with a staff as Benjamin Netanyahu and Donald Trump kneel before him. The caption reads: “You will kneel before Iran.”
'Hypocrisy'
Pro-government figures have hailed the move as a patriotic success. Conservative political reporter Hossein Saremi posted: “Today’s grand Iranian gathering showed that people and the state share one essence: Iran itself. Nothing can take our homeland away.”
Others, however, called the spectacle “hypocrisy.” Journalist Gholamhossein Pashaei wrote on X: “Every year you close Pasargadae to stop people from celebrating Cyrus Day, yet you unveil Shapur’s statue in Enghelab Square with drums and fireworks during Fatimiyya (mourning period)!”
Dissident commentator Hamid Asafi called the ceremony “a perfect snapshot of the Islamic Republic’s contradictions.”
On Telegram he wrote: “A week ago they closed Cyrus’s tomb out of fear of the crowds, and now they glorify Shapur in the same breath. The Islamic Republic fears living history but poses for selfies with its corpse.”
He added: “They know people no longer respond to rosaries and sermons. That’s why they’ve brought history back to the stage—in a controlled costume. If they can’t erase the past, they’ll try to own it.”
The irony deepened as UNESCO formally recognized Cyrus’s Charter as one of the earliest human-rights documents.
President Masoud Pezeshkian wrote on X: “Iran, the cradle of dialogue, justice, and coexistence, can still inspire peace today.”
Users swiftly replied, questioning how such pride could coexist with a government that blocks access to Cyrus’s tomb each year to those wishing to visit it on his birthday.
