The US-Iran Agreement: a strategic defeat for US imperialism

The 14-point “memorandum of understanding” is set to suspend the US war on Iran for 60 days. During this period, Iran will reopen the strait of Hormuz, and the US will end the blockade of Iranian ports. Sanctions will be lifted on the purchase of Iranian oil, allowing resume exporting crude oil and petroleum products.

The accord also calls for the “immediate and permanent termination of military operations on all fronts, including in Lebanon” and ensuring the “territorial integrity and sovereignty of Lebanon”. How this will be implemented is unclear, as Israel continues to attack Lebanon and increase its territorial occupation, while Iran has declared it will attack Israel and gulf countries if Israel continues its offensive during this ceasefire.

The contested issues of Iran’s nuclear program and $100 billion in frozen Iranian assets held by the US are not part of the deal and are to be addressed at a future point. Significantly, the deal calls for a $300 billion international reconstruction and economic development fund to rebuild Iran, to be funded primarily by regional Gulf states.

Return to Status Quo Ante

In essence, the deal returns the situation to what it was before Trump attacked Iran, although after a cost of $132 billion dollars and destruction of US miliary installations across the region; and the murder of over 3,500 Iranians, including the targeted killing of over 175 mostly school girls at the Shajareh Tayyebeh Elementary School in the city of Minab.

All told, the agreement confirms that the war is a significant defeat for US imperialism, and in particular for the Trump-led offensive to attempt to reverse the decline of its global power with none of the stated objectives achieved: No mass uprising in Iran, no regime change, no destruction of Iran’s military capacity, no ending of Iran’s nuclear program, no reopening of the strait.

This defeat is more significant than in Iraq or Afghanistan, where the US military easily defeated, occupied, and imposed regime change before losing in the long term. Iran has much smaller military capacity than the US, yet was able to thwart the US attack, keep its regime and military infrastructure intact, successfully able to attack and destroy US bases and naval assets built up around the region, inflict unprecedented missile damage in Israel, and close and control a key global commercial choke point forcing the US to capitulate.  

This last point has significant consequences. The idea that a relatively smaller regional power like Iran can outmaneuver, out-strategize, and inflict such a blow to the world’s largest and most deadly military force, shows to the rest of the world that the US is not invulnerable and can be defeated; potentially emboldening US rivals and regional powers to resist Trump and the US state, and even take similar action if threatened or targeted like Iran.

Trump weakened, but Democrats cannot provide alternative

The failed military adventure is also extremely unpopular in the US, with polls showing that 78% of the population wanting the war ended for good and more than 70% believing the US didn’t succeed in its objectives. Support for Donald Trump has all but collapsed, with only about 37% of voters approving his actions. This represents the lowest polling “floor” on record for a president at this stage in their term.

Despite the War on Iran being a debacle for Trumpism, which might otherwise lead to a surging opposition, the Democrats cannot politically capitalize on this failure. Despite rhetorically opposing Trump’s version of the war on Iran, the Democratic Party leadership has also pursued a policy of regime change in Iran. That the Democrats do not oppose US war on Iran—only Trump’s foolish effort—they could only symbolically posture against it by trying to pass an impossible “War Powers Act” bill through Congress.

Aside from congressional theatrics, they offered no substantive or coherent opposition and made no effort to mobilize popular opposition to the war for fear that it could go beyond safe “No Kings”—like messaging and turn against US imperialism. Since they cannot offer a real alternative to war and cannot turn popular anger and disaffection to their side—they have instead joined the war-mongering rightwing chorus against Trump’s MOU, calling it a “surrender document”.

The Iranian regime is strengthened by the outcome in the immediate term. It is in a better position to negotiate for return of its frozen assets, roll back US sanctions, consolidate its grip within Iran against dissidents and opponents, and shift the balance of negotiating power in its favor with the Gulf States who placed losing bets that the US would defeat Iran.  

There are setbacks for Iran. The death of its supreme leader and uncertain condition of his son as successor—badly injured and rumored to be in a coma in Russia—and the deaths of many other key political and military leaders and scientists has yet uncertain consequences. What we can tell so far is that the Revolutionary Guard and a more hardline faction of the regime have also consolidated its power within the state.

War benefits US imperial rivals and strengthens regional alliances

Russia and China also emerged from the conflict stronger than before. Russia gained from selling weapons to Iran, while US sanctions were waived on Russian oil and gas sales allowing it to reenter global energy markets. China benefited from the Iran war by capitalizing on the global energy crisis to accelerate its energy exports, by acquiring heavily discounted Iranian crude oil, reselling scarce liquefied natural gas to other Asian nations, and gathering valuable intelligence on U.S. military tactics. Both China and Russia tested key weapons and communication and surveillance technologies, which proved more effective in the war zone against the US than anyone expected.

The US-led military assault provided Beijing with a real-world testing ground to observe U.S. weapon capabilities and performance, missile and air defense systems, logistics, strike patterns, naval blockade tactics, deployments, and energy vulnerabilities. This has provided a valuable study for China, especially in the context of it preparing it for a potential invasion of Taiwan which could trigger war with the US, including how to deal with a potential US-led blockade of the Strait of Malacca.

The war also produced new political alignments that show a strengthening of regional alliances. Pakistan and Saudi Arabia have moved closer and are considering a new military agreement that could also include Turkey. India, Israel, and UAE are in similar discussions. Dubai and Abu Dhabi are at odds and have raised the possibility of splitting the UAE.

Truce will likely not last—unless we can organize mass opposition

The agreement is precarious. The most contentious issues are yet unresolved and could prove impossible to reconcile within the 60-day period. The war has destabilized the region and modified the global economy, contributing to instability, shortages, inflation, and uncertainty. Israel could derail it if it continues to pursue its genocidal onslaught in Lebanon, which it appears likely to do, with or without US support. Considering all these scenarios, the ceasefire will likely fall through and there will be more war and destruction.

The only way socialists, anti-imperialists, and anti-war opponents in the US can work to prevent Trump from ramping the war back up is to organize mass opposition. This could be done by connecting opposition to the war and the massive costs of its failure to rising inflation, capitalist price gouging, and a spiraling cost of living that is pushing many working-class people to the brink of poverty. Links should also be made between opposing the war abroad and its inverted war at home, with capitalist class war on the working class, ICE attacks on migrants and refugees, and authoritarian state repression of the political left. We have to figure out how to activate and mobilize the simmering class anger that pervades US society today, and direct it against a corrupt and violent regime that will not stop until it is stopped.