[Today’s Iran war post is launching less fleshed out than I would like because reasons. That means it might not be final until 8:30 AM EDT. Please return or refresh this page then for the completed version]
Even though the US spin, which the Western press duly amplifying, is is that the US pushed back the start of the Iran war talks in Switzerland, we had cited Iran media reports in comments yesterday that Iran had suspended the talks over Israel’s continued attacks in Lebanon. Professor Marandi, in a talk yesterday with Judge Napolitano, said that Iran had prepared strikes (this was before the announcement that Iran was not going to Switzerland) but apparently decided to try non-kinetic measures first.
In addition to this apparent breakdown over Israel insubordination, which may not be resolved quickly if at all, other looming problems are that the US cannot deliver on at least one deal term that the Iran regards as important, the $300 billion de facto reparations fund. JD Vance has attempted to clarify this fuzzy promise by describing it as Gulf States making individual investments in Iran. Note that I see no motion toward trying to get BlackRock or equivalent to saddle up to raise a fund, which got nowhere in Ukraine when Ukraine would be giving ownership interests in Ukraine assets, something Iran has not and would never agree to do.
Aurelien has also pointed out that the US committed to across-the-board sanctions relief, including of the disputed UN “snapback” sanctions triggered by the so-called E-3 (Russia and China are not honoring them because they see them as procedurally invalid). So will the US succeed in getting the UK, France and Germany to agree? My guess is that the will but at some (probably well-buried) cost to the US.
Where this all winds up is too bushy (in decision tree terms) to come up with likely outcomes if the talks fail, which seems likely. The MOU document made big concessions to Iran, but Vance’s patter to reporters say the US expects Iran to take action before the US delivers on key commitments, such as the release of frozen assets and sanctions relief.1 Iran has repeatedly stressed that its distrust is so high that the US needs to take concrete steps first. This is a procedural outtrade even before getting to substance.
However (and readers are encouraged to speculate), there are potentially at least two general types of fallbacks. One is that the US uses the failure of talks to walk away, and tries to depict that as better than a “deal”. Iran does not get sanctions relief, does not get much or any of its frozen assets, keeps its nuclear program as is, and the US leaves Israel and Iran to fight with each other. The wee problem with that is that Iran is not likely to accept no sanctions relief. It would at least want waivers on sales of its oil. So does it shut the Strait again?
The second is a narrower agreement than the one contemplated in the MOU, with some items removed (like the undeliverable $300 billion fund) in return to other concessions by the US, like greatly reducing its military footprint in the Middle East.
Keep in mind that it is hard to see how the status of Iran and the Strait of Hormuz can remain unsettled for all that long. In the Vietnam War took a very long time to reach a settlement, and that was with highly competent negotiators on the US side. With Iran willing and able to close the Strait of Hormuz when oil reserves are approaching critically low levels , there is no luxury of time.
If I were Iran, at a minimum, I would get as many of my tankers past the US blockade as possible. Then I might consider threatening to close the Strait again. That alone would rattle the nerves of risk-averse vessel operators.
First on the Iran cancellation, via Al Mayadeen:
The Iranian negotiating delegation had earlier postponed its trip to Switzerland due to the ongoing Israeli aggression on southern Lebanon, an informed source told Al Mayadeen on Thursday.
According to the source, the delegation had already been preparing to depart Iran and launch the first round of negotiations, scheduled to span 60 days, before the decision to suspend the trip was made.
Tehran had previously informed both Washington and the mediators that the Lebanon file remains a central component of the negotiations and will directly influence whether the talks proceed, the source stated, citing Iranian warnings that continued Israeli aggression extending up to 10 kilometers deep inside Lebanese territory constitutes a clear violation of the first clause of the Memorandum of Understanding and the framework agreement.
Later, from International Business Times in Iran-US Negotiations Collapse Before They Begin as Lebanon Strikes Spark Diplomatic Crisis (hat tip Ann):
A fragile 60‑day push to restart high‑stakes Iran–US talks has reportedly collapsed before it even began, with Tehran suspending its delegation’s planned trip to Switzerland in protest at Israeli strikes in southern Lebanon that it claims breach a key clause of a new memorandum of understanding.
According to reports from Iranian and regional outlets, including Fars and Al‑Mayadeen, Iran has halted preparations for its delegation’s trip to Switzerland, where the first round of indirect talks with US officials was expected to begin. They claimed that the situation on the ground has already rendered the process ‘void.’
The US State Department has not commented on the matter.
And the Iran threat to exit the “deal” looks serious. From Larry Johnson in US and Iran will not Meet in Switzerland… Israel Derails the Negotiation:
Israel ignored Donald Trump’s request that it halt military operations in Lebanon and chose instead to escalate its attacks south of the Litani river. Intense clashes are taking place on the outskirts of Nabatieh, Lebanon, between Hezbollah and Israeli forces. …Trump has the power to force Netanyahu to submit by cutting off or delaying the delivery of critical military aid and by withdrawing US air defense assets, i.e., the Patriot and the THAAD.
Iran’s Supreme National Security Council issued a statement late on Thursday regarding the MoU:
“With careful supervision of the negotiation process, if any violation or breach occurs by the American side, according to the predetermined plan, a countermeasure will be taken.”
The statement emphasizes “complete distrust of the treacherous and treaty-breaking enemy” and readiness to respond.
And Iran’s semi-official Fars News Agency reported that:
The Iranian delegation’s meeting with the U.S. in Geneva is postponed, until there is a ceasefire in Lebanon. Until that time, Iran will not unilaterally implement its committments of the MoU—until the U.S. does the same.
The Middle East Spectator reports that if Israel does not implement an immediate ceasefire in Lebanon and stop its advances along all sectors, Iran will consider withdrawing from the Memorandum of Understanding
Yet Bloomberg continues with its disgraceful practice of misinformative headline to keep Mr. Market happy:
The article proper, however, did flag the wee matter of Israel attacks:
Iran has insisted on a ceasefire in Lebanon as part of the interim peace deal finalized with the US this week, and didn’t send a delegation to the talks as a result of the fresh hostilities. There’s as yet no indication of a new start date for the discussions….
It’s not yet clear if the developments will affect the strait, where maritime traffic has picked up since Trump and Iranian counterpart Masoud Pezeshkian signed the agreement. Traffic through the waterway — critical for global energy supplies —- appeared to thin early Friday, a day after a surge in renewed oil flows as the two countries vowed to lift a dual blockade.
While we are on the topic of Strait of Hormuz transits, while Iran has had tankers passing the US blockade line in the Sea of Oman, not much else seems to be moving. In yesterday’s post, we quoted the full text of this tweet:
PetroChina couldn’t find a tanker.
Neither could Indian Oil.
Here’s what actually happened this week:
PetroChina tried to hire a Very Large Crude Carrier a ship that holds 2 million barrels to load Iraqi crude between June 25-30.
Got 6 offers.
All at freight rates nearly… pic.twitter.com/NcYpIgZir0
— Jack Prandelli (@jackprandelli) June 18, 2026
More on doubts about traffic levels not recovering:
Verified crossings still at historic lows
As of 17 June, Kpler observed six verified crossings across the monitored zone. Traffic was weighted east to west, and most vessels followed established Iranian coastal passage routes. One sanctioned vessel, Ostria, was identified… pic.twitter.com/SBo6tF7sFP
— Kpler (@Kpler) June 18, 2026
And from Shanaka Anslem Perera:
Trump signed the Iran peace at Versailles two days ago. The White House published the text. And today the deal is already suspended. A country put its name to a ceasefire and walked away from it inside 48 hours…
The water saw this before the diplomats did. The US navy has pulled back and the strait is open on paper, yet only 17 to 29 tankers a day are crossing, a fraction of the 100 to 140 a normal day carried, and trackers undercount because the brave ones are running dark. The few supertankers that crossed switched their transponders off through the strait and turned them back on only once they were safely out the far side.
That is the whole signal. You do not run a ship dark through water you trust. Sailors priced this peace before the leaders finished signing it, and they priced it as fear. Goldman says traffic claws back to 70 percent at best, and not before the end of next month.
A war that opened by killing Iran’s supreme leader was supposed to close with a signature. It got two signatures and a suspension in the same week. The map says peace. The captains, still sailing blacked out, say wait.
On Israel’s continued defiance, from Antiwar in Netanyahu Reaffirms Israel Won’t Withdraw From Lebanon Despite US-Iran MoU (hat tip Kevin W):
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Thursday reaffirmed his position that Israel won’t withdraw from southern Lebanon and end its war in the country despite the US-Iran Memorandum of Understanding that calls for an end to the conflict.
“We will restore security and prosperity to northern towns,” Netanyahu said. “That requires maintaining the security zone in southern Lebanon; it requires that we not leave there, as long as Israel’s security needs require it.”
The Israeli military on Thursday also made clear it was not withdrawing from Lebanon and published a new map showing an expanded occupation zone…..
Israel Hayom reported that Netanyahu is bracing for pressure from President Trump over the war in Lebanon, but that there is currently no US demand for the withdrawal of Israeli troops from the country.
Israel Hayom reported that Netanyahu is bracing for pressure from President Trump over the war in Lebanon, but that there is currently no US demand for the withdrawal of Israeli troops from the country.
The aforementioned map, as reproduced by Reuters, in Israel demarcates expanded Lebanon occupation zone, challenging US-Iran pact:
The military, which in April published a map marking its so-called buffer zone in southern Lebanon, released a new map that shows its troops are operating several kilometres deeper into the country, including near the Hezbollah stronghold of Nabatieh north of the Litani River.
Israeli troops have been operating in some of those areas for several weeks, but the military had not yet published a map showing the expanded zone of control, which it marked in dark red in the map published on Thursday.
An Israeli military official said the military “will continue to remove threats (to) soldiers and the civilians of the State of Israel that are identified beyond the security zone,” in effect saying it could carry out attacks deeper into Lebanon.
Israel has intensified its attacks into Lebanon:
Israel is bombing the south of Lebanon and the Bekaa Valley: no condemnation from the president Joseph Aoun or the prime minister Nawaf salam and no change of plans regarding the meeting with Israeli terrorists in Washington.
— Elijah J. Magnier 🇪🇺 (@ejmalrai) June 19, 2026
Ben-Gvir’s bloodlust is chilling, if also not surprising:
⭕️ Israel’s far right National Security Minister Itamar Ben Gvir responds to Vice President JD Vance: “For every tear shed by an Israeli mother, a thousand Lebanese mothers should cry. All of Lebanon should burn.”
He writes:
“With all due respect to the Americans, Israel must… pic.twitter.com/C99u8JrhJl
— Drop Site (@DropSiteNews) June 19, 2026
But Hezbollah is hitting back hard:
An IDF tank was totally destroyed by Hezbollah killing four soldiers. Here is what we know and what it means:
1) Early reports were that an anti-tank guided missile was behind the damage. It is now believed to be a suspected drone or ATGM.
2) Kfar Tebnit where this happened,…
— Shaiel Ben-Ephraim (@academic_la) June 19, 2026
⭕️ ‘Difficult incident’ reported in southern Lebanon, israeli soldiers’ casualties confirmed. – Israeli sources.
— MenchOsint (@MenchOsint) June 19, 2026
Israel is doubling down on staying in Lebanon. From Aljazeera’s live feed:
Israel’s defence minister reiterates plan for military to stay in Lebanon
Israel’s Defence Minister Israel Katz has said Israeli troops will remain in a so-called “security zone” in southern Lebanon, extending from “the coastline to the heights of Beaufort”.
In a post on X paying tribute to four Israeli soldiers recently killed in combat in southern Lebanon, Katz said, “We will not allow harm to our soldiers and citizens, and any violation of the ceasefire by Hezbollah will be met with great force.”
And:
Netanyahu says Israeli army will stay in Lebanon ‘as long as necessary’
Israeli troops will stay in Lebanon “as long as necessary”, says Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, promising to make Hezbollah pay a “heavy price” for its attacks.
“Israel will not tolerate attacks on our soldiers or our territory, and it will exact a very heavy price from Hezbollah for these attacks,” Netanyahu said in a statement on social media, after the military announced the deaths of four Israeli soldiers in Lebanon.
“Israel will remain in the security zone in southern Lebanon for as long as necessary for the protection of the communities of the north,” he added.
Big if true:
Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps Navy (IRGC-N) has once again closed the Strait of Hormuz, warning all vessels to not attempt to cross, following Israel’s refusal to withdraw from and strikes this morning on Southern Lebanon, with the following message being broadcast on… pic.twitter.com/MPcDbzDvp9
— OSINTdefender (@sentdefender) June 19, 2026
I can’t get to Tasnim now, but this may be reporting as opposed to advocacy:
Block Strait of Hormuz Until Full Israeli Withdrawal from Lebanon, Cancel All Future Negotiations
Israel’s brutal aggression in southern Lebanon has intensified significantly over the past 24 hours.
— Tasnim News Agency (@Tasnimnews_EN) June 19, 2026
So Israel looks to be betting on a Trump TACO in its favor. Note that Israelis recognize the risk that the US could cut off weapons supplies (hat tip @DMichaelTripi):
In comments yesterday, reader Earl described how Eisenhower brought Israel to heel in the Suez Crisis, mainly using financial tools:
Israeli’s defiance of the MOU requirement for it to leave Lebanon recalls its attempts to retain Sinai after occupying it in the 1956 Suez Crisis. Eisenhower forced Israel to leave Sinai through a combination of economic and diplomatic pressure. Economic pressure included threats to cut off all economic assistance including tax deductible donations, bond purchases and military assistance. Ike bypassed the UN Security Council with veto equipped Britain and France by obtaining a Geneal Assembly resolution calling for withdrawal. Recommended is You Tube video What Eisenhower Did When Israel Refused to Give Back Land After Winning War by Best WW2 Archives
Sam Husseini, in When Presidents Clashed with Imperial Israel, made a key point:
Eisenhower forced Israel’s withdrawal (along with Britain and France) from Sinai and Gaza using the Uniting for Peace mechanism at the United Nations in 1956. Eisenhower doing this probably led to Israel’s decision to get a nuclear bomb, so it could effectively threaten the US.
Before the negotiation rupture, Daniel Davis focused on ambiguities in the MOU and the implications of the US trying to impose obligations to co-combatant Israel when it was frozen out of the talks. Davis gives some useful specifics about how the US and Iran still seem to have sharp differences over what the “deal” amounts to:
Mario Nawfal interviewed Douglas Macgregor just after the news of the suspension of talks broke. Macgregor discussed the pressure that would be brought to bear on Trump, including impeachment and criminal investigations of relatives. He even discussed Trump resigning but hoped he would do so only after he had cleaned up the Iran mess:
On the domestic (and Israel-enlisted) knives coming out, e-mailed headlines from The Hill yesterday tell a tale:
Cruz: ‘Giving billions of dollars to lunatics’ in Iran ‘is not a good idea’
Trump defends Iran deal amid criticism: 5 takeaways
Senate Republicans raise alarm over Trump’s deal with Iran
The Memo: Hawks lament ‘disaster’ on Iran as Trump strains to sell deal
The Memo: Vance tries to sell Iran deal as skeptics get loud
Vance hits back at Iran deal critics in GOP, Israel: 5 takeaways
Live updates: Vance calls Iran deal a ‘win-win’ even as Trump’s MOU draws heat
Janta Ka’s update includes an important clip of remarks by the Saudi Foreign Minister, effectively throwing cold water on the richest GCC country being willing to pony up funds for Iran. He stressed that the limited trust that was being built with Iran before the war was shattered by the Iran’s attacks, and it would take a lot of work to get relations back on the semblance of an even keel.
More on Gulf state unhappiness:
The Gulf State leaders are happy the war is ending. But are deeply unhappy with the MOU. This is why:
1) The MOU is silent on the only weapons that ever hit the Gulf. Iran’s nuclear program never cratered an Emirati airport. Its missiles and drones did. Iran now holds them…
— Shaiel Ben-Ephraim (@academic_la) June 19, 2026
Note this section:
7) Watch whether the Gulf gets written into the next round over the coming 60 days. The real demand was always a seat, not just missile caps. If not involved, this will have long-term implications for US-Gulf relations.
Done for now! Hopefully I will not see you until Monday….
___
1 From CNBC in Vance says U.S. isn’t giving Iran ‘a cent’ as he defends Trump peace deal (hat tip Ann):
Vice President JD Vance defended President Donald Trump’s interim peace deal on Thursday, insisting that the United States is not paying the Islamic Republic and that any economic benefits for Iran depend on full compliance with the agreement.
“The United States isn’t giving up a cent of money to Iran,” Vance said…
“The only way the Iranians get any of these resources … is if they comply fully” with the terms of the deal.
