Iran and the US agree on a Memorandum of Understanding

US President Donald Trump said on Monday (16 June) that a memorandum of understanding (MoU) with Iran has been "all signed" electronically, and the Strait of Hormuz will be “completely open” by Friday (19 June).

US officials said the agreement was signed by Trump, US Vice President JD Vance and main Iranian negotiator and Parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf. The details of MoU have yet to made fully public, but some details have been selectively leaked. The MoU, brokered in significant part by Pakistan and set to be formally signed in Switzerland on Friday, includes a cessation of hostilities in Lebanon, an end to Iranian restrictions on the Strait, a reduction of US military assets from the region, and some relief of sanctions and frozen Iranian assets. Iran's nuclear program (the original justification of the war) is deferred to be decided during the following 60-day period, though the memorandum secured Iran's reaffirmation of its commitment to the Non-Proliferation Treaty. The regional welcome was broad and immediate, with Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Kuwait, Qatar, Egypt, Lebanon, Jordan, and Türkiye all issuing statements of relief. Yet that relief was calibrated. Gulf capitals had spent three and a half months watching Washington threaten a partner over a waterway, contemplate occupying an island within artillery range of the Iranian mainland, and preside over what they privately called the worst global energy crisis in decades, all while urging restraint behind closed doors. In truth, the memorandum of understanding resolves the immediate crisis. Whether it resolves the deeper question of what kind of security guarantor Washington intends to be is another matter entirely, and the quiet work of building alternative architecture across the region suggests that Gulf capitals are not simply waiting around for the answer.

From brinkmanship to deal, the deeper reckoning for Gulf security has only just begun

Monday (8 June) marked one hundred days since the war began and more than sixty days since a ceasefire was announced on 8 April. However, neither milestone seemed to be the true bearer of a real resolution. Writing for Arab News, Dr. Abdel Aziz Aluwaisheg put this reality into stark terms: the IMF has revised its 2026 global growth forecasts from 3.4 percent to 2 percent if the closure continues, inflation is predicted to rise to 6 percent, and GCC economies that were projected to grow by more than 6 percent last October are now expected to shrink by more than 8 percent. Before the closure, around 13 million barrels of oil, 140 billion cubic meters of natural gas, and 20 percent of the world's fertilizer supply crossed the strait daily. Saudi Arabia is not the worst affected, as it maintains Red Sea export channels and land routes. Still, the kingdom truly thrives when the world economy grows, and ending the war is now as much about economic self-preservation as it is about principled diplomacy.

The question of what reopening looks like has become considerably more complicated. Ceasefire efforts have had substantial struggles following the downing of a US Army Apache helicopter by Iranian forces near the Strait, with CENTCOM launching retaliatory air strikes and Tehran striking multiple US military installations across Jordan, Kuwait, and Bahrain, including most notably the headquarters of the US Fifth Fleet. As this escalation continued, Trump posted that US forces would seek to occupy Kharg Island, the 22 square kilometer island through which 90-96 percent of Iran's crude oil exports pass. Writing for the Middle East Monitor, Dr. Jannus TH Siahaan argued the gamble made is increasingly likely to backfire. Iran is already operating under near emergency conditions following a naval blockade that had been imposed since 13 April, with more than twenty tankers stranded off the coasts of Kharg. Occupying the island, hence, would impose little additional economic pressure while inflaming Iranian nationalism. Kharg also lies only 21 miles from the Iranian mainland, placing every American position within range of Iranian artillery and short-range ballistic missiles. The World Bank warned that should fighting around Kharg further disrupt energy supplies, global economic growth could plunge to 1.3 percent.

With Hormuz remaining closed throughout the conflict, the threat of a second chokepoint had also been taken seriously. Writing for The New Arab, Ariya Farahmand documented that Iran and its allies had signalled intentions to activate the Bab al-Mandab, the Red Sea strait via which around 15 percent of global trade and 12 percent of seaborne oil passed in 2023. Saudi Arabia, which had grown dependent on Red Sea exports following the Hormuz closure, faced the prospect of economic siege had that threat materialised. The rerouting of the Gulf economy had already transformed the region's logistics landscape in ways that are predicted to outlast the conflict itself. Writing for Gulf International Forum, Robin Mills documented that Khor Fakkan went from handling 2,000 shipping containers a week before the war to roughly 50,000. New pipeline and rail projects were fast-tracked, though Yanbu and Muajjiz were already heavily burdened, and major infrastructure requires three to four years to complete. Qatar remained the most exposed throughout as its LNG industry, which can only export via specialised tankers loading at facilities on the Strait, left it with no viable alternative routes for the duration of the closure.

This briefing was first published Arabia Concise on 16 June 2026. It was prepared by Santiago Ferbel-Azcarate, with support from the commonspace.eu editorial team, drawing on reporting from Arab News (Riyadh), Middle East Monitor (London), The New Arab (London), and the Gulf International Forum (Washington D.C.).

Related articles

Editor's choice
News
COP 17 in Armenia

COP 17 in Armenia

Armenia is currently hosting the COP17 conference of the Convention on Biological Diversity, which began earlier this week (19 October) and will run until 30 October, bringing around 15,000 participants from 196 different countries to Yerevan. At a leaders' summit held as part of COP17, Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan expressed realistic ambitions: “We are halfway towards achieving these goals (Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework), and we must honestly acknowledge that we are not yet moving in the right direction. Our task now is not to make new promises, but to fulfil the commitments we have already made.” Pashinyan pointed towards Armenia's own records, noting that the whitefish stock in Lake Sevan has increased substantially in the last ten years. Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian and Georgian Prime Minister Irakli Kobakhidze also addressed the summit, with Turkiye sending its agriculture minister. However, there were no reports of Azerbaijani representatives attending. The conference has given Yerevan a valuable international platform, yet the absence of Azerbaijan is likely to be read as a sign that the peace process in the South Caucasus has not yet been translated into wider regional cooperation. The leaders' summit was opened by Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan, who stressed that hosting the conference was a great honour for Armenia. He expressed hope that it would 'be productive and contribute to protecting our planet's biodiversity'. 'We – the citizens of Armenia, the government, state authorities and local governments – owe a debt to our nature,' the prime minister said. He noted that the international community had already developed the concept of 'living in harmony with nature’ and adopted the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework in 2022, setting out goals and specific targets to be achieved by 2030. 'We are halfway towards achieving these goals, and we must honestly acknowledge that we are not yet moving in the right direction. Our task now is not to make new promises, but to fulfil the commitments we have already made,' Nikol Pashinyan said. The COP17 conference is expected to adopt a declaration at leaders' level. More than 30 documents are scheduled for discussion. If approved, the commitments set out in them will become legally binding on countries that are parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity.”
Editor's choice
News
Landmines present to the European Union both a contradiction and a dilemma

Landmines present to the European Union both a contradiction and a dilemma

Finland’s decision to buy one million landmines creates a serious contradiction in the policy of the European Union, and is symbolic of a bigger dilemma facing European countries as they get used to the need to acquire “hard” power to face an increasing threat from Russia. Finland is seeking to acquire one million anti-personnel mines at a cost of 100 million euros. Finland, together with Poland, Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia last year abandoned the Ottawa agreement, the international framework that bans the use of anti-personnel mines, which the EU had been instrumental in establishing and supporting. All five countries cite the threat from Moscow as the reason. Colonel Riku Mikkonen of the Army Command told Finland’s national news agency STT that officials are now gathering information from suppliers regarding the deal, the AFP news agency reports. Helsinki would like domestic manufacturers to supply the mines, with contracts signed by the end of 2027 and production up and running by 2028. “It would be useful in many ways if Finnish companies produced the anti-personnel mines in Finland,” Mikkonen said. About half a dozen Finnish firms qualify, he told STT. “However, at this stage, buying the mines from abroad is not totally ruled out,” he added. LANDMINES PROVIDE THE EU WITH BOTH A CONTRADICTION, AND A DILEMMA Eliminating landmine contamination worldwide is one of the EU’s main soft power postures, and it basks in its record as the biggest funder of anti-landmine action in the world. But the fact that 5 of its 27 member states  have now left the Ottawa Treaty dents the EU moral high ground. It is a contradiction that is too big and important to be ignored. It also presents the European Union with a deeper dilemma. The threat from Russia is changing what the EU has stood for decades, namely a force for good able to mobilise its considerable soft power for the greater good of humanity. How the Union will implement this change will define its future. In the meantime landmines have not become any less lethal, benign, or unimportant. They remain in many parts of the world a major threat to life, an impediment to prosperity, and a potential trigger to further conflict. The 22 EU members states that still adhere to the Ottawa treaty must regroup, and be more assertive in their quest against anti-personnel land mines. All the reasons why they supported the Ottawa treaty in the first place still exist. The message must be clear: NO TO LANDMINES!

Popular

Editor's choice
Interview
Thursday Interview: Murad Muradov

Thursday Interview: Murad Muradov

Today, commonspace.eu starts a new regular weekly series. THURSDAY INTERVIEW, conducted by Lauri Nikulainen, will host  persons who are thinkers, opinion shapers, and implementors in their countries and spheres. We start the series with an interview with Murad Muradov, a leading person in Azerbaijan's think tank community. He is also the first co-chair of the Action Committee for a new Armenian-Azerbaijani Dialogue. Last September he made history by being the first Azerbaijani civil society activist to visit Armenia after the 44 day war, and the start of the peace process. Speaking about this visit Murad Muradov said: "My experience was largely positive. My negative expectations luckily didn’t play out. The discussions were respectful, the panel format bringing together experts from Armenia, Azerbaijan, and Turkey was particularly valuable during the NATO Rose-Roth Seminar in Yerevan, and media coverage, while varied in tone, remained largely constructive. Some media outlets though attempted to represent me as more of a government mouthpiece than an independent expert, which was totally misleading.  Overall, I see these initiatives as important steps in rebuilding trust and normalising professional engagement. The fact that soon a larger Azerbaijani civil society visits to Armenia followed, reinforces the sense that this process is moving in the right direction." (click the image to read the interview in full)