Peace in West Asia demands structural fixes

Peace and stability in the Persian Gulf region, in particular, and West Asia in general are paramount for global peace and stability. Though an MoU has been reached between Iran and the US, it is difficult to achieve any form of reconciliation between these two because of some of the lingering issues like the nuclear fiasco, energy and control over Hormuz chokepoints, and issues confronting Israel’s security. Unless these issues are resolved first, it is difficult to achieve any tangible solution to the Iran-US strategic impasse.

Nearly four months after the onset of the war in February 2026 between Iran and the US, there is hope that both have agreed to a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU), which will translate into an agreement that brings much-needed peace to this otherwise volatile region. The MoU, as stated, paves the way for expected peace in this tumultuous region. The formal signing of the MoU was fixed on June 19. The key takeaways from the MoU, as reported, are: a) Iran will get an opportunity to export oil to the international market through the Strait of Hormuz, as the US will end the blockade of this strait; b) Iran will not pursue any further nuclear enrichment programmes.

More from Opinion

Another important aspect relating to the Agreement was on Lebanon, where, over the years, Iran has been fighting a proxy war against Israel through Hezbollah. Though an MoU was reached between the two sides, the moot point to highlight is whether the process can maintain its tenuous pace. The same can be considered in the context of acrimony between the two sides over the years, which has shaped West Asian geopolitics. This is not the first time the US has attempted to break the ice in West Asian geopolitics. A few years ago, it brokered the Abraham Accords, a peace deal, though it could not make much headway.

Context of the Iran-US MoU

The Iran-US MoU can be seen in the context of incessant warfare in the Persian Gulf region and a global economic recession, following the disruption of energy supplies to international markets caused by the blockade of the Strait of Hormuz. Another important factor that needs to be emphasised here is that since 2023, the Iran-Israel war and also Tehran’s support for the Lebanon-based Hezbollah have been some of the moot points of conflict. Though the war between Iran and the US started in February 2026, some of these complexities are evident in the present context and can be traced back to the historical processes. In fact, this historical mistrust is one of the stumbling blocks in achieving a tangible solution to the present West Asian crisis.

The framework of the Iran-US MoU comprises 14 clauses, including some of the issues discussed above. As per the MoU, the US administration has also agreed to release the frozen funds held by it. At the same time, the MoU has also provided for the establishment of a committee to “monitor” the agreement. The MoU also stipulates that all nuclear programmes will be subject to monitoring by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). Though a closer look at the negotiation process of the MoU reveals an initial move by both countries toward compromise, several complexities remain. At the same time, the MoU stipulated that a 60-day monitoring period would be conducted to review the agreement's progress. It is necessary to understand the geopolitical fallout of the negotiation process, as it will determine the process's success or failure.

Domestic and Geopolitical Repercussions

As discussed above, the agreement between Iran and the US, if implemented, will have an enormous impact on the geopolitics of West Asia in particular and on the world at large. This is despite the agreement having generated a geopolitical puzzle.

1) Israel is one of the major actors in the present West Asian imbroglio. Without Israel at the negotiation table and without taking it into confidence, the negotiations may be in jeopardy. It may be recalled here that the Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has completely rejected the negotiation between Iran and Israel. In fact, some of the statements being released by Netanyahu soon after the agreement was concluded reflected his deep sense of frustration and resentment towards the US, as well as its arch-rival Iran. The MoU has also, of late, contributed to the spat between the US and Israel. As reported, US President Trump stated that he called Netanyahu “Warrior Prime Minister”. This statement itself reflects the initial discord between the two countries. Israel's move in rejecting the MoU can be evident from the fact that, instead of brokering peace, it attacked Lebanon, which resulted in heavy casualties for the Shia terror group Hezbollah. Even Israel’s National Security Minister, Itamar Ben-Gvir, gave a blunt rebuff to the agreement when he stated that Israel is ready to fight for “permanent war”. This reflects Israel’s resentment towards the Peace Agreement. If this is prolonged, it will affect West Asian geopolitics.

(It is pertinent to mention here that Israel's hard posturing may also affect the Israel-Lebanon Agreement, though both parties agreed to a 10-day truce as per the decision taken in Washington, which took place recently. Thus, by excluding Israel from the agreement, the Trump administration cannot expect to achieve any tangible result in the direction of the peace process.)

2) Along with Israel, both Iran and the US have a few convergence points that will propel them to move ahead. The same is evident from the fact that both countries will now wait another 60 days before the agreement comes into effect. As per the MoU, the US has agreed to assist Iran with approximately 300 billion US dollars for its reconstruction. However, the moot point is who will finance this assistance. The US economy is under high inflationary pressure and experiencing slow growth. In this context, can the US government provide financial assistance to Iran? This may create further resentment towards the Trump administration in domestic politics. Hence, providing aid worth 300 billion US dollars is an impossible task for the Trump administration, rendering the MoU unimplementable.

3) Though Iran and the US reached an MoU to end the war, one issue that remains to be answered is whether the hardcore Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) led by Ayatollah Mojtaba Khamenei, the son of the deceased Iranian leader Mojtaba Khamenei, will accept the agreement. In fact, the core objective of the Trump leadership is to remove the IRGC leadership and favour regime change. Though people are getting a respite after a truce, the question that arises here is how long this status quo will prevail. Similarly, there is a growing resentment about the US involvement in the Iranian war, as it costs the economy dearly. According to recent data published in the Pentagon’s briefing to the US Congress and reproduced on the Iran War Cost Tracker website, between 28 February 2026 and 16 June 2026, the total cost of the war for the US was 113.3 billion US dollars. Along with this, the US has also suffered heavy casualties, and many of the US bases located in West Asia were hit by the Iranian missiles. Thus, the escalation of war with Iran has created a new form of domestic crisis for the US. A number of analysts have argued that the Iranian crisis put the Trump administration in a fix.

4) The nuclear question remains a major stumbling block in reaching a final agreement, as discussed above. The same can be inferred from Trump’s statement, which he made on his social media, where he underlined that "there would be no further negotiations” if the nuclear question had not been addressed by Iran by allowing the IAEA to inspect its nuclear facilities attacked by Iran. On the other hand, the Iranian authorities are strongly opposing the inspection of its nuclear sites by the IAEA. Since this is a moot point of discord and cannot be resolved amicably within the sixty days as mentioned in the MoU.

5) The Iran-US war has both regional and global geopolitical ramifications. The war between the two is also a normative war since the US used to provide protection to the Sunni countries of West Asia from Shia Iran. In fact, the US extended this protection to Sunni Arab countries, especially in the aftermath of the 1979 Islamic revolution in Iran. Thus, by engaging with Iran, the US may lose its clout in Arab geopolitics. Though there is a spat within the Arab world between the UAE and Saudi Arabia, Washington is still maintaining its hegemony in this part of the world. Similarly, despite the recent differences between Israel and the US, both of them are staunch allies. One of the major factors contributing to the predominance of the US’s role in this part of the world is due to the consistent support it received from Israel even during the Cold War era. In this context, it is too early to say that there may be differences between Tel Aviv and Washington over the Iran question.

Iran, over the years, has been getting consistent support from both Russia and China in its war against the US. Whether it is on the nuclear issue, the West Asian peace process, or Palestine, all three countries share more or less similar positions. One may underline here that Iran warded off the US’s threat to its security because of the support from Russia and China. In this context, it is too early to state that Iran will engage with the US in any form of agreement.

6) One major problem which hinders Iran's engagement with the US is also the question of energy issues. Right now, Iran is emerging as a major ally of European countries on energy issues. Over the years, European countries have taken a soft stance toward Iran, recognising its importance as a source of energy. European countries are now facing the energy question, especially in the aftermath of the Russia-Ukraine war; they want a more assertive Iran to ensure the securitisation of energy supplies. If they get energy from Iran, it will reduce their dependence on the US for energy supplies. In this context, Iran may use its energy advantage as a bargaining chip with European countries to negotiate with the US.

7) One of the important aspects of the ongoing peace agreement between Iran and the US is the involvement of Pakistan and Qatar. In fact, both Iran and the US will pay a heavy price in the long run for trusting Pakistan and Qatar. The persecution of the Shia population in Pakistan by successive political establishments over the years, as well as its dispute with Iran over the Baluchistan issue, will also deter Iran from having a meaningful dialogue with Pakistan. Both Qatar and Pakistan are overtly and covertly supporting all forms of radicalism and terrorism. Their support for the Palestinian terrorist groups Hamas and Hezbollah is a well-known fact. The question that arises here is how Islamabad and Doha can play a mediating role with their dubious history of promoting global terrorism.

Though the US engages with Pakistan to promote its geopolitical objectives in South Asia, in the bilateral relations, Washington does not trust Islamabad. The same can be evident from the fact that just before the commencement of talks between Iran and the US, the chief negotiator for the US, J D Vance, the Vice President, took a dig at Pakistan by stating that “I think part of the misalignment here is that in the Pakistani and Qatari systems, they don't quite have the First Amendment and freedom of the press, and so there isn't this sort of expectation that the text is going to be out there for the American people to interrogate and look at." This Vance attributes to the overt reaction from the Pakistani government, which claims to play a major role in negotiating with both countries.

If Iran and the US want to pursue peace negotiations involving Pakistan and Qatar, then it will have a dent in the peace process.

India’s Strategic Concerns

A closer look at the Iran-US agreement has varied geopolitical dimensions; it is also necessary to understand its repercussions on global and West Asian regional geopolitics in particular. India is also not immune to the ongoing development in West Asia. Because of India’s location near the Persian Gulf, its energy interests, and the presence of the Indian diaspora, it has immense strategic stakes in this part of the world. Any kind of disruption and volatility is directly affecting India’s security. It is in this context that one can understand India's vital interests in bringing peace to the war-torn region. The present Iran-US war is providing an opportunity for Indian policymakers to rethink New Delhi’s strategy in both global and regional geopolitics and, at the same time, to reassess foreign policy in view of evolving geopolitical complexity. When the initial MoU between both sides was reached on 15 June 2026, the Prime Minister of India, Narendra Modi, in a message, expressed his optimism "that the implementation of this understanding will help restore peace and stability in the region and ensure the freedom of navigation and commerce".

One may add here that India is facing a daunting task of managing domestic energy security ever since the onset of the Russia-Ukraine war in 2022, the subsequent Red Sea crisis and the Iran-Israel war. The present war in West Asia has created an artificial energy security crisis for India, which imports around 85 per cent of its conventional energy from external markets. In this context, it is necessary to examine the current crisis in West Asia and its impact on India’s energy crisis.

India faced the heat of the West Asian war when the Strait of Hormuz was closed, halting energy exports to India. The impact in India is evident from the fact that prices of LNG, LPG, and crude oil rose substantially amid scarcity. As per recent data shared by the Petroleum Ministry, Government of India, India imports around 30 per cent of its oil through the Strait of Hormuz. Along with this, India imports substantial amounts of LPG and LNG from the West Asian region, which passes through this Strait. Even Russian energy, which is also imported, passes through this strait. This shows how important the Strait of Hormuz is to India’s energy security. The number of Indian energy carriers that were stuck when the war erupted reflects how important the Strait is to India. Even Indian ships carrying oil to India got attacked by US missiles, as a result of which 3 Indian sailors were killed. In this context, volatility in the Straits and the continuation of the war in this region will adversely affect India’s energy security. Though efforts are underway to diversify India's energy supply through the Gulf of Oman, linking it to the Arabian Sea is an alternative; in the short term, however, shifting the shipping corridor in a short period of time is quite difficult.

The second important aspect that needs attention here is that Iran is emerging as a major transit hub for India, owing to its connectivity with the post-Soviet space. Whether it is the International North-South Transport Corridor Project (INSTC); the Chahbahar initiative, which connects with Afghanistan and Central Asia; or the Ashgabat agreement, where India and Iran are part of the process to enhance connectivity, or linking Chahbahar port with Ashgabat port, which will enhance India’s outreach to Central Asia. If Iran prolongs its war with the US, it is going to have an adverse impact on India’s connectivity projects.

The third aspect that needs attention from an Indian perspective is the slowdown of the West Asian economy because of the war, as a result of which a large number of the Indian diaspora are returning home. Over the years, the Indian diaspora has contributed enormously to the Indian economy through remittances. The Department of Economic Affairs, Government of India, in its monthly Economic Survey report published in May 2026, clearly notes the fallout of the economic crisis triggered by the onset of the war in the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) countries. The report adds that in 2023-24 the GCC countries accounted for 38 per cent of India’s total remittance. It has been observed that the GCC countries have been severely hurt by the onset of the war. In this context, if the crisis prolongs, it will affect the energy economy of the GCC countries. In this context, this may affect the flow of remittances to India. It has been reported that a large chunk of the Indian diaspora is returning home. This process will impact the Indian economy.

Another important point to underline is that if the two parties to the war do not reach a consensus, the war may have spillover effects in the Arabian Sea and South Asia. The war may also involve West Asia. In that case, even the Red Sea and the Suez Canal will be affected. For instance, there already exists volatility in Afghanistan. Taking advantage of the support from both China and the US, Pakistan may also attack Afghanistan. As discussed above, there exists a trust deficit between Iran and Pakistan. Similarly, the militarisation of the Indian Ocean is driven by the presence of armed ships in the Strait of Hormuz. This may subsequently affect the Indian Ocean. As reported by Reuters, France and Great Britain, along with the US, met in April 2026, with support from 51 countries, to discuss plans to ensure dominance over the Strait of Hormuz. The movement of nuclear submarines and the use of missiles in and around the Strait of Hormuz have certainly affected the strategic scenario of the Indian Ocean. This directly impacts India’s security and trade relations. To enhance India’s access as well as the free flow of energy through the Strait of Hormuz, the Government of India enunciated doctrines of “Operation Urja Surakhsya” under which the Indian Navy will guide the energy vessels that are coming to India. To ensure an uninterrupted energy supply, the Indian Navy deployed 5 advanced warships near the Strait of Hormuz.

Along with deploying naval warships, India has, since the beginning of the war between Iran and the US, advocated the need for diplomacy and dialogue as a means to resolve the crisis. India’s approach to the war in West Asia can be considered in the framework of deep-rooted strategic cooperation with the three parties to the war: Iran, Israel, and the US. Like Iran, India shares a civilisational relationship. In this background, India maintained a delicate balance. One of the prime concerns of India in the present war in West Asia is to minimise the collateral damage which impacts the civilian population. The same was communicated to all three of the above-mentioned major actors in West Asia. It may be recalled here that in the month of March 2026, the UNSC resolution condemned Iran’s attack on the civilian population of West Asian countries.

Similarly, in the recently concluded SCO Council on Foreign Ministers' meeting held at Dushanbe, Tajikistan, on June 14, 2026, India disassociated with the SCO Statement and, on the other hand, called for "channels of dialogue and diplomacy be utilised to work towards de-escalation, and it is essential that the international community undertake endeavours in that direction". It may be recalled here that despite a balanced position, Iran appreciated India’s role, as did Israel. Even the US, despite its recent hostile action against the Indian sailors and obstructing the movement of Indian ships near the Strait, is taking a cautious note. The same can be evident from the fact that the Iranian deputy foreign minister, Kazem Gharibabadi, stated that "Iran welcomes any Indian initiative to defuse the West Asia crisis".

Conclusion

A closer look at Iran-US relations and the present strategic stand-off between them reflects the geopolitical complexity of the West Asian landmass. It may be mentioned that this geopolitical quagmire is rooted in mutual mistrust that exists not only among the West Asian countries but also along with Israel. The US, despite being an external actor in this geopolitical landmass, is poking its nose by taking advantage of the geopolitical fault lines of the Shia and Sunni rivalries in West Asia. It may be recalled that prior to the Islamic Revolution in 1979, the US and Iran had a strong partnership. Similarly, Iran was the first Islamic country to recognise Israel.

The present stalemate between Iran and the US is a product of geopolitical fallout between Israel and Iran over the years. In this regard, the US is providing the necessary support to Israel. Given the complex geopolitical fault lines, it is too early to say whether any form of rapprochement between the US and Iran is possible. Some of the moot questions, like nuclear issues and relations between Iran and Israel, are going to impede the truce. Another important aspect to mention here is that the Trump administration is keen to put Iran in a difficult position so that it can dominate the global energy market by exporting its oil and gas. To achieve this, the US is keen to control the strategic chokepoint of the Strait of Hormuz. Already, Russia is on the margin of the global energy market following its war with Ukraine. Thus, in a nutshell, it can be emphasised that energy will shape the future of Iran's relations with the US.

For India, peace and stability in West Asia, in general, and the Persian Gulf, in particular, are paramount because of its strategic stakes in this part of the world.

(The author teaches at the School of International Studies, JNU, New Delhi. Views expressed in the above piece are personal and solely those of the author. They do not necessarily reflect Firstpost’s views.)