While the world looked optimistically to a diplomatic breakthrough with the signing of an agreement between the United States and Iran on 18 June, one that could contribute to ending the war entirely and reopening the Strait of Hormuz, the accord in fact reflects a state of mutual distrust between the two sides — a state made plainly visible in their reciprocal attempts to improve negotiating terms and strengthen their leverage before returning to the table.
Developments have confirmed that there is no agreement on the "agreement" itself; rather, it is a preamble to a ceasefire that allows for more serious negotiations to take place. The two countries' divergent visions regarding the Strait of Hormuz, the nuclear file, and frozen assets remain unresolved, and recent confrontations appear to be little more than attempts by both sides to improve their terms.
The current agreement between Washington and Tehran is closer to a crisis-management framework than a final settlement, with the major disputed files left unresolved. The ambiguity surrounding the agreement's provisions — particularly those relating to freedom of navigation through the Strait of Hormuz — has opened the door to contradictory interpretations by both parties, which have quickly been reflected on the ground in the form of military escalation that puts the ceasefire at risk.
The New York Times reported that the vague wording accepted by American negotiators is now threatening peace efforts, after each party adopted a different interpretation of a clause stipulating that Iran would take "arrangements, using maximum efforts, to ensure the safe passage of commercial vessels" through the Strait of Hormuz for 60 days. Guaranteeing unconditional passage is considered the most significant concession Tehran has made to the United States under the agreement.
According to analysts, no detailed explanation was provided of what is meant by "arrangements" or "maximum efforts." Washington secured a pathway to reopening the Strait of Hormuz, calming energy markets, and reducing the risk of regional escalation, while Tehran obtained a halt to the fighting, the possibility of resuming oil exports, and sanctions relief. It is worth noting that both parties share a common interest in preserving this understanding — and in its ambiguity simultaneously — and will therefore not risk taking steps or reactions that could bring it down entirely.
The Strait of Hormuz has been the cornerstone of the war's repercussions and remains one of the most significant unresolved issues to be addressed in the second phase of US-Iran negotiations. Divergent views between the two countries over the crisis surrounding the imposition of fees on vessels passing through the strait could derail negotiations and prevent the conclusion of a final agreement.
According to American estimates, imposing fees for "security services and environmental protection" in the Strait of Hormuz could generate approximately $40 billion annually. This is why the United States and all countries of the world reject the Iranian proposal and want the strait returned to its pre-war status.
Iran will not obtain the gains it is demanding until it complies with what it has agreed to, and until that compliance is verified through a monitoring and verification mechanism that has been put in place — given the complete absence of trust in Tehran's intentions based on past experience.
The next phase will focus on examining the major and sensitive disputed files, which continue to constitute the principal obstacle to establishing a final and sustainable understanding between the two parties. Opening the Strait of Hormuz is undoubtedly the foremost priority, given its importance to maritime traffic and energy markets.
Through the Doha talks currently underway, Washington is seeking guarantees to prevent Iran from disrupting navigation in the strait whenever negotiations reach a deadlock. Iran, for its part, is manoeuvring by threatening to disrupt the strait in pursuit of recovering its frozen assets.
It goes without saying that both US President Donald Trump and the Iranian leadership's acceptance of this agreement comes within the framework of a relative understanding, while both sides always retain scenarios ranging from a phased de-escalation to a stalemate or a broader confrontation in the strait — a situation that also portends that the coming phase will not be easy.