Will the US-Iran ceasefire hold till Friday’s signing?

Peace in West Asia is rarely secured by an announcement. The old adage that there is many a slip between the cup and the lip has to be kept in mind when dealing with a ceasefire between the US and Iran. There have been countless false alarms.

The news first broke with an announcement by Pakistan Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif on Sunday. This was followed by US President Donald Trump’s post on Truth Social. Finally, Iran confirmed the news with a statement from the Supreme National Council, saying that the text of a “Memorandum of Understanding” was finalised. The agreement will be signed on Friday in Geneva.

Details of the agreement are sketchy, with both sides framing it to suit their domestic agenda. According to Trump, the agreement will mean “the toll-free opening of the Strait of Hormuz” and “the immediate removal of the United States naval blockade”. Iran’s emphasis, however, was that with a 60-day ceasefire, war and military operations on all fronts, including Lebanon, would cease, since the understanding was reached on Sunday. The naval blockade imposed against Iran will be lifted within 30 days. The nuclear talks and an end to sanctions on Iranian oil will follow, according to Tehran. US Vice-President JD Vance waded in to emphasise that “Iran will never have a nuclear weapon… This is just a great thing for the American people”.

More from Opinion

The news of a proposed agreement has generated cautious optimism, but also considerable scepticism. The details remain sketchy, yet opposition is already gathering force among American hawks and Israel’s supporters, many of whom regard any accommodation with Tehran as a strategic mistake. As the region waits to see whether the agreement survives, the question is whether this ceasefire can overcome the political and ideological forces that have derailed so many previous attempts. Much will depend on how this plays out in Jerusalem, Washington and Tehran.

Israel

Israel Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has the most to lose from a ceasefire. Having got his wish to get America involved in a joint war against Iran, his hopes of de-fanging the regime have not been realised. Instead, Tehran appears stronger than before the war. Netanyahu may avoid a public confrontation with Trump, but Israeli calculations on Lebanon, Hezbollah and Iran remain central to whether the ceasefire holds.

National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir said: “My position is clear: We are not partners to this agreement that does not ensure our security,” and “Israel is not a US subject and it does not bind us in any way.” The leader of the Israeli Democrats Party, Yair Golan, was quoted in The Times of Israel as saying: “Tremendous military achievements won through the courage of our pilots and the blood of our fighters were erased, while Netanyahu stood aside — weak, ill, isolated and lacking influence.”

The agreement has been received with disappointment among many on Israel’s political right and in the security establishment. Netanyahu, who is facing an election in October, has not said anything publicly so far but will be looking for ways to break the agreement. The strong Israeli lobby in Washington, including major donors, will reach out to influential lawmakers to ensure that their concerns on ballistic missiles, Iranian proxies and Tehran’s nuclear capabilities are addressed decisively.

Israel remains wary of any arrangement that leaves the Iranian threat unresolved. Israel has already made it clear that it will not withdraw from its security zone in South Lebanon. This could prove a deal-breaker, as Iran remains equally adamant that Lebanon is part of the agreement. Iran cannot afford to let down Hezbollah. Netanyahu has shown no sign so far of being prepared to end Israel’s current offensive against Hezbollah in Lebanon, but is holding his horses for now.

Washington

Trump is a great salesman, and he will sell the deal as a major win for himself. Trump’s challenge will be keeping together two constituencies that often pull in opposite directions: his instinctively anti-war MAGA base and the strongly pro-Israel wing of the Republican Party. He will boast that he is the first American president to get Iran to abandon its nuclear programme (at least for now). He is framing it as a win for global stability and an economic catalyst with the reopening of the Strait of Hormuz. “Let the oil flow,” he declared with a flourish.

Trump has long looked for an off-ramp, and now that he has got a memorandum in place, he will ensure that a deal is done. He hopes to get inflation down before the November mid-term elections. Republican Lindsey Graham, a staunch pro-Israel senator, was Trump’s cheerleader when he went to war against Iran. Anxious not to displease his leader, Graham welcomed the agreement but said that there were some “troubling aspects” and that it should be vetted by Congress before going through. The good news for Trump is that the war was unpopular with the majority of Americans, who are more concerned about regular bread-and-butter issues.

Tehran

Despite major blows since February 28, including the killing of Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei and much of its top military and political leadership, Iran sees the agreement as a victory that forced the US to call for peace.

The leadership may see strategic and economic benefits in a pause, but Iran’s hardliners, always suspicious of the US, have held several demonstrations against any compromise. The targets are Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi and Parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, who are being accused of betrayal for handing away Iran’s leverage over the Strait of Hormuz. However, with Supreme Leader Mojtaba Khamenei on board, the IRGC is expected to fall in line.

The next few days leading up to the signing on Friday are crucial. A minor incident can unravel the tentative agreement. The ceasefire will succeed only if Washington can defend it, Tehran can live with it, and Jerusalem chooses not to undermine it.

(Seema Guha is a journalist who has extensively covered foreign policy and geopolitics. Views expressed in the above piece are personal and solely those of the author. They do not necessarily reflect Firstpost’s views.)