Iran threatens response without ‘full implementation’ of US deal
Iran threatens response without full implementation – As Iran prepares to honor the memory of its former supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, the nation’s Parliament Speaker, Mohammad Bagher Qalibaf, has issued a warning about an Iranian countermeasure in case the U.S. and Israel fail to fully adhere to the interim peace agreement. The statement comes amid heightened geopolitical tensions, with Qalibaf emphasizing the need for complete compliance from the American and Israeli sides during high-level discussions aimed at finalizing a lasting peace deal.
Key Points from Qalibaf’s Address
According to the semiofficial Iranian Students’ News Agency (ISNA), Qalibaf asserted during a meeting with Belarusian lawmaker Igor Sergeyenko that Iran would take proportionate action if the U.S. and the Zionist regime—referring to Israel—did not uphold their commitments. “We strongly demand full implementation of the agreements, and if the U.S. and the Zionist regime fail to fulfill their commitments, Iran will resume proportionate actions,” he said Friday, as reported by ISNA.
“We strongly demand full implementation of the agreements, and if the U.S. and the Zionist regime fail to fulfill their commitments, Iran will resume proportionate actions,” Qalibaf said Friday, according to the semiofficial Iranian Students’ News Agency (ISNA), during a meeting with Belarusian lawmaker Igor Sergeyenko.
The Renewed Tensions in the Persian Gulf
The recent escalation in hostilities follows a week of confrontations between the U.S. and Iran in the Persian Gulf, marking the first direct military exchange since the signing of the 60-day memorandum of understanding (MOU) last month. The skirmish reignited fears about the stability of the interim deal, which was designed to ease tensions and set the stage for a more permanent agreement. Key objectives of the MOU included ending regional conflicts, reopening the Strait of Hormuz—a critical maritime route for global oil trade—and resolving disputes over Iran’s nuclear program.
President Trump’s administration had previously warned of escalating military actions against Iran, particularly after suspected drone attacks on vessels navigating the oil corridor. This led to retaliatory strikes by the U.S. military on Iranian missile and drone storage sites, as well as coastal radar facilities. However, the conflict has since eased, with a U.S. official informing The Hill on Sunday that both nations had agreed to a temporary pause in hostilities, allowing ships to transit the strait without interference. Technical discussions on the MOU are expected to continue, according to the official.
Qalibaf’s Criticism of U.S. and Israeli Strategies
Qalibaf also criticized the U.S. and Israel for their military approach, calling it “baseless propaganda.” In a separate statement attributed to ISNA, he claimed that the combined forces of the United States and the Zionist regime had failed to achieve their goals in the Ramadan War. “The United States and the Zionist regime did not achieve any of their goals in the Ramadan War, and today everyone has come to the conclusion that the military action against Iran has failed and, ultimately, they requested a ceasefire themselves,” he reportedly said.
“The United States and the Zionist regime did not achieve any of their goals in the Ramadan War, and today everyone has come to the conclusion that the military action against Iran has failed and, ultimately, they requested a ceasefire themselves,” he reportedly said.
Meanwhile, the New York Times reported on Thursday that U.S. officials believe there may have been an Israeli plot to eliminate key Iranian negotiators during earlier spring talks on an interim ceasefire deal. Current and former American officials cited in the report suggested the attack was an attempt to undermine the diplomatic process. Israeli strikes in the early stages of the war had already targeted several Iranian leaders, including Ali Larijani, secretary of Iran’s Supreme National Security Council, and Gholamreza Soleimani, the commander of Iran’s Basij paramilitary force.
Khamenei, Iran’s former supreme leader, was among the casualties of the conflict, killed in targeted strikes on his compound during the initial days of the U.S.-Israel military operation. His funeral ceremonies are expected to span the week before his burial on July 9, a symbolic moment for the nation as it reflects on the leadership and legacy of the late Ayatollah.
The Path Forward for the MOU
The interim agreement, which has been a focal point of negotiations, was intended to serve as a temporary framework for resolving disputes between Iran and the U.S. Qalibaf and Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi have played central roles in these talks, representing Tehran’s interests in discussions aimed at solidifying a broader understanding. The agreement sought to address multiple issues, including the reopening of the Strait of Hormuz, a lifeline for international oil shipments, and the resolution of nuclear-related concerns.
Despite the recent clashes, the U.S. and Iran have shown a willingness to continue dialogue. The decision to stand down has been praised by some as a pragmatic step toward de-escalating the situation, though concerns remain about the durability of the truce. Qalibaf’s remarks underscore Iran’s resolve to hold the U.S. accountable for its adherence to the terms of the deal, while also highlighting the nation’s strategic patience in the face of military threats.
Context of the Conflict and Its Impact
The conflict has drawn attention to the broader geopolitical dynamics at play, with both sides seeking to assert their influence in the region. The New York Times’ report on the potential Israeli plot adds another layer of complexity, suggesting that even within the framework of the MOU, there are underlying tensions and covert strategies. The strikes on Iranian leaders, including Khamenei, have not only dealt a blow to the country’s political and military structures but have also intensified the stakes of the negotiations.
As the funeral of Khamenei approaches, the Iranian leadership will likely use the occasion to reaffirm its commitment to the interim agreement and its vision for a stable future. Qalibaf’s warnings serve as a reminder that Iran remains prepared to take further action if its demands are not met, while also signaling the nation’s determination to engage in dialogue despite the challenges.
The situation in the Persian Gulf continues to evolve, with the MOU acting as both a framework for cooperation and a battleground for competing interests. As the U.S. and Iran navigate this delicate balance between diplomacy and military readiness, the world watches closely for any signs of renewed hostilities or breakthroughs in the peace process.
In summary, the renewed tension between the U.S. and Iran highlights the fragility of the interim agreement and the ongoing efforts to solidify a lasting peace. Qalibaf’s recent statements, combined with the broader context of the conflict, underscore the importance of full implementation of the deal to prevent further escalation. The fate of the MOU—and the stability of the region—rests on the willingness of both parties to uphold their commitments in the face of evolving challenges.
