E-Paper
All is not well with the US-Iran peace deal
This article is authored by Sanjay Turi and Nitish Kumar.
The peace agreement between the US and Iran reminds us of a widely regarded and internationally recognised Palestinian poet and author, Mahmoud Darwish’s famous lines of his poetry:
“The war will end/ The leaders will shake hand/ The old woman will keep waiting for her martyred son/ The girl will wait for her beloved husband/ And those children will wait for their heroic father/ I don’t know who sold our homeland/ But I saw who paid the price.”
The people who are suffering the most from this war are primarily the Iranian and Lebanese citizens, people working as labourers in the Gulf, and common men affected by the rising food and energy prices, who are categorically dependent on the shipping routes of the Strait of Hormuz. The people benefiting from this war have possibly nothing to do with the ground reality of suffering taking place across the conflicting regions.
There are several loopholes in this ongoing peace deal in Burgenstock that may prevent it from getting materialised. One is that Israel is not a party to this agreement, although the most important player in this conflict. After 40 days of intense fighting between the US and Iran, this war dragged on for another 60 days mainly because of Iranian proxy Hezbollah’s engagement with Israel in Lebanon, which made the Strait of Hormuz (a main bone of contention) subsidiary to the Lebanese issues in this conflict. While Iran strongly considers stopping Israeli attacks on Hezbollah in Lebanon as a main point of this peace agreement, the US considers it a separate matter of conflict in the region. However, Iranian leadership somehow managed to convince the US to consider the Lebanese issue an important point of Iran’s peace proposal, but Israel is not at all ready to cooperate with the US, arguing that it will never compromise on its national security. Since Israel considers Hamas and Hezbollah an existential threat, Israeli defence minister Israel Katz, in this context, says the IDF are free to take action if Israel’s security is under threat. He further said that Israel will indefinitely maintain its position in the southern security zone and continue its strikes on Lebanon until Hezbollah is eliminated. Therefore, it would not be wrong to assume that the Lebanon issue gives Israel an indirect veto power over the entire peace process.
It is widely regarded that the Hormuz blockade has significantly disrupted the global supply chain, and the problems arising from it have not only affected countries heavily dependent on oil and energy coming from the Gulf, but have also led to skyrocketing food and energy prices in the US market. Since President Trump is under domestic compulsion to end or pause this war, as the mid-year election in the US is around the corner, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, on the other side, would want to continue this war to remain seated in power, as Israel’s most contentious election in recent times is also about to be conducted in the upcoming months, where Netanyahu is already facing a significant backlash not only from the opposition but also from the common citizens and his own party members. On the other side, Vice President JD Vance in Burgenstock can also be seen speaking from the perspective of the US’s upcoming mid-year election. Defying criticism from people in his own country and targeting American voters, JD Vance said that unfreezing Iranian assets will also benefit American farmers, as the sanctions waiver will allow them to export soy, corn, and wheat to Iran, thereby enriching American farmers at home.
Many experts argue that the peace agreement could backfire on President Trump, as the conditions set by the Iranian delegation have compelled the US to unfreeze its $12 billion assets held in various banks across the world. They have additionally set the condition that the $300 billion be used for the reconstruction of Iran, which technically will not be given by the US as such, but the sanctions waiver will allow industrialists worldwide to invest in Iran. Though this deal superficially appears to benefit Iran, the framework of this agreement has been set by the US in such a way that it is bound to fail; However, it will certainly benefit the US and Israel. Vance, in his Burgenstock talk, further reiterated that the US will ensure that unfrozen funds are not used to fund non-State sectors. And, here lies the catch.
Since Hezbollah is internationally declared a terrorist organisation, it is, at the same time, a core proxy fighting wing of Iran. After the collapse of Syria and the elimination of Hamas to some extent, Hezbollah is the only surviving proxy group through which Iran holds indirect control over Israel in the region. Without Iran’s financial support to Hezbollah, it will never be able to survive the Israeli crackdown. The Iran-Israel conflict is not about who will have how much territorial control in the region, but the fundamental conflict of this war is all about becoming a regional hegemon in West Asia. Since Hezbollah and Hama’s existence are very much important for Iran’s contest to become a regional hegemon against Israel, it is not possible for the US to identify whether unfrozen ($12 billion) or development funds ($300 billion) are being used to support Hezbollah. As long as these proxies exist, Israel, in the name of national security and existential threat, will continue to defy the peace agreement and continue its crackdown in Lebanon, further paving the way for the abandonment of this peace deal.
It would not be wrong to assume that the US is just looking for its two objectives to be reached--first, the Strait of Hormuz to return to normalcy and second, the relocation of enriched uranium from Iran. President Trump, being a businessman, is smart enough to trap Iran in this deal. Given that the US has already lost billions of dollars in this war and still could not achieve its target, Trump, as an alternative, is strategically doing all these things to achieve his vision as well as his short-term electoral gain. This peace agreement appears to holistically benefit Iran, but, in reality, will likely benefit Israel the most.
(The views expressed are personal)
This article is authored by Sanjay Turi, doctoral candidate, Centre for West Asian Studies (CWAS) and Nitish Kumar, doctoral candidate, Centre for Russian and Central Asian Studies (CRCAS), School of International Studies (SIS), Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi.
