US and Iran to Sign Deal Reopening Strait of Hormuz as Israel Rejects Ceasefire Terms

The United States and Iran have reached a tentative agreement to end a devastating three-and-a-half-month military conflict, with a formal memorandum of understanding scheduled to be signed in Switzerland on Friday. Mediated by Pakistan, the diplomatic breakthrough aims to halt hostilities that originally erupted following joint US-Israeli strikes on Iran in late February. The initial and most critical phase of the pact focuses on immediately reopening the Strait of Hormuz, a vital global energy artery that Tehran had blockaded since the war's onset, sending shockwaves through the international economy.[1][2][9]

The economic relief from the announcement was instantaneous across global markets. Following the news of the impending signature, global crude oil prices plummeted nearly 5% toward $80 a barrel, a sharp recovery after surging above $110 during the height of the naval blockade. President Donald Trump publicly celebrated the reopening, declaring that the waterway would be 'completely open' and permanently toll-free. 'Ships of the World, start your engines. Let the oil flow!' Trump posted to social media, noting that commercial vessels and oil tankers had already begun moving through the previously restricted maritime zone.[1][2][3]

While the immediate international focus remains on maritime security and energy stabilization, the memorandum triggers a strict 60-day window for broader, more complex negotiations. These upcoming talks will address the potential lifting of US sanctions, the unfreezing of Iranian assets—which Iranian state media claims could include an initial $12 billion—and the implementation of strict policing powers over Iran's nuclear program. Iranian Deputy Foreign Minister Kazem Gharibabadi hailed the deal as bringing an 'immediate end' to the war, while President Masoud Pezeshkian publicly called the diplomatic resolution a monumental regional achievement.[1][2]

However, the bilateral agreement has triggered a political earthquake in Israel, where leaders across the political spectrum view the pact as a dangerous capitulation to Tehran. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who had heavily influenced the initial US decision to launch strikes against Iran, held a press conference acknowledging a rare and deep rift with Washington. 'He is the U.S. president, I'm the Israeli prime minister—we often see eye to eye and there are also instances where we see less eye to eye,' Netanyahu stated, vowing that Israel would unilaterally prevent Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon 'with or without an agreement.'[4][6]

The diplomatic friction extends acutely to the ongoing conflict in Lebanon. The US-Iran deal reportedly stipulates a comprehensive cessation of hostilities on all fronts, which explicitly includes the volatile Israel-Hezbollah border. Yet Israeli officials have categorically rejected this clause, refusing to halt their northern campaign. National Security Minister Itamar Ben Gvir declared that 'Trump's agreement does not bind us,' asserting Israel's status as an independent sovereign nation. Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich echoed the defiant sentiment, promising the military 'full freedom of action' in Lebanon regardless of the Geneva signing.[4][5]

The open defiance from Jerusalem has prompted unusual and highly public pushback from the White House. Trump issued a rare rebuke of Israel's military tactics against Hezbollah, specifically criticizing the widespread destruction of civilian infrastructure in the pursuit of militants. 'You don't have to knock down an apartment house every time,' Trump told reporters at the G7 summit, warning that the continued heavy bombardment of Beirut risked unraveling the fragile peace framework before the ink on the memorandum could even dry.[3][6]

The diplomatic fallout is also reverberating loudly in US domestic politics, where the administration's foreign policy is under intense scrutiny. Former Vice President Kamala Harris sharply criticized the administration's handling of the entire crisis, labeling the initial February conflict a 'war of choice' that needlessly endangered global stability. Harris predicted that the messy, controversial resolution would cost Republicans dearly in the upcoming midterm elections, likening the situation to the severe political blowback faced by the Obama administration over its own fraught Iran negotiations.[8]

Internationally, the reaction from Western allies has been one of cautious, measured relief. NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte hailed the reopening of the Strait of Hormuz as a 'massive step forward' for global economic stability. European leaders, however, remain deeply wary of unresolved details buried in the text. Particular concern surrounds Iranian claims that last-minute negotiated changes grant Tehran the right to charge fees for maritime services in the strait—a formulation that Western nations fiercely oppose as a direct violation of international freedom of navigation.[3][7]

The ultimate success of the Geneva signing now hinges entirely on whether the United States can enforce the ceasefire across a deeply fractured and distrustful region. With Israel vowing to continue its military campaign against Hezbollah, and Iran warning that the entire bilateral deal is strictly contingent on Israeli compliance in Lebanon, the upcoming 60-day negotiation window threatens to be just as volatile and unpredictable as the devastating war it aims to replace.[5][10]