Despite being the weaker military party, Iran's ability to inflict persistent pain on regional shipping and U.S. allies gives it leverage. To secure a ceasefire, the U.S. may have to offer incentives like sanctions relief, allowing Iran to turn military weakness into diplomatic strength.

The US-Iran framework deal was primarily motivated by the need to reopen the critical Strait of Hormuz for oil transport. This narrow economic aim took precedence over allies' broader security concerns, such as dismantling Iran's missile program, revealing a divergence in strategic priorities between the US and Israel.

The US offered financial incentives for peace, failing to grasp that Iran's goal was not money but solidifying regional dominance. The agreement's clauses on controlling the Strait of Hormuz and establishing a sphere of influence were Iran's primary objectives, which the US negotiator seemingly overlooked.

The Trump-Iran agreement is framed as a 'Memo of Understanding' (MOU), a common but non-enforceable business term. This signals a lack of serious commitment and legal standing, suggesting it's a temporary political maneuver rather than a durable international treaty, as only a fraction of MOUs ever become consummated deals.

The US-Iran agreement is a "deal to do more deal making," deferring critical issues like the nuclear program and long-term sanctions. This approach secures short-term stability but fails to resolve underlying conflicts, creating a high probability that the crisis will re-ignite once the interim negotiation period ends.

President Trump and his administration are sending contradictory signals on the Iran conflict, simultaneously claiming it is 'very complete' while also preparing for further action. This inconsistency confuses markets and allies, pointing to a severe lack of a coherent and unified strategy within the administration.

Trump's negotiation strategy, particularly with Iran, involves a massive, visible military presence to create extreme pressure. This 'peace through strength' approach aims to force concessions at the negotiating table by making the alternative—imminent, overwhelming force—undeniably clear and credible.

The public threats of a military strike against Iran may be a high-stakes negotiating tactic, consistent with Trump's style of creating chaos before seeking a deal. The goal is likely not war, which would be politically damaging, but to force Iran into economic concessions or a new agreement on US terms.

Contrary to the belief that Gulf states always wanted a hardline US policy on Iran, their perspective shifted after 2019. When Iran attacked Saudi and UAE assets and the Trump administration failed to respond, they realized the US was an unreliable defender. This prompted them to make their own peace with Iran, a policy directly undermined by the recent US-led war.