TakingStock

It certainly has the feel of market manipulation, doesn't it?

Just some more love taps. Either the tit-for-tat goes on forever or there will be have to be some fundamental change in the approach to Iran because as long as the IRGC is around, an MOU or future deal aren’t worth the paper they’re printed on.

According to Fars just now, Iran halted talks with the US due to Trump’s threats about Iran’s proxies in Lebanon.

Iran is playing Trump so badly with this it would be comical if the stakes weren't so high.

People are really delusional if they think this "deal" no matter the spin the White House puts on it, will erase thousands of years of history in how Iran as both a civilization and country operates.

The Post hits on all of the key points to explain why the MOU in its current form is an unmitigated disaster for the United States:

LINK

Two of their points:

quote:

---

“The Islamic Republic of Iran will conduct dialog with the Sultanate of Oman to define the future administration and maritime services in the Strait of Hormuz in discussion with other Persian Gulf or [Gulf] states in line with the applicable international law and the sovereign rights of coastal states of the Strait of Hormuz.”

The mention of “administration and maritime services” leaves open the possibility that Iran and Oman could charge service fees to ships that want to access the strait.

Legally, the Strait of Hormuz is an international waterway, and vessels cannot be tolled under international law. They can, however, be required to pay fees for services provided.

Iran and Oman as recently as Monday were discussing how they could implement a service fee, a source familiar with mediations told The Post.

The Iranian Foreign Ministry also spoke openly about its desire to charge ships for navigational assistance, environmental protection and insurance-related services.

---

quote:

---

“United States of America undertakes with regional partners to develop a definitive, mutually agreed plan with at least USD $300 billion for the reconstruction and economic development of the Islamic Republic of Iran.”

The memorandum does not specify where the $300 billion would originate, leaving unanswered whether the funding would come primarily from Gulf states, as previously mentioned by senior US officials; private investments as described by US and regional official; individuals; or international financial institutions.

President Trump has repeatedly insisted American taxpayer dollars would not be used to fund Iran, but that is not enumerated in the MOU. Meanwhile, the size of the proposed package would rank among the largest economic development initiatives ever contemplated for the region.

But Hudson Institute senior fellow Rebecca Heinrichs, who led the Pentagon’s 2024 Strategic Posture Commission on US nuclear strategy, told The Post it “doesn’t matter” where the funds come from — they shouldn’t be offered on principle.

“It doesn’t matter that this money isn’t American taxpayer dollars. That’s about the cost of the damage the US and Israel did to Iran and this feels like reparations,” she said

“The Iranians are responsible for billions of dollars of damage to US aircraft, to US basing and ally basing and equipment.”

“[Treasury] Secretary Bessent mere days ago said that frozen Iranian funds could be used to repay the damage they caused. I think for most Americans that makes a lot more sense, and from a strategy perspective, it does send a message to would-be aggressors that we would make them pay,” she added.

The text also makes clear that the details of the initiative have not yet been established, so many of the questions are unanswerable at this time.

---

Rubio looked like he was being held hostage standing behind Trump at the G7 press conference today. He wore his emotions on his sleeve and it was obvious he's livid about this outcome.

While the United States isn't providing direct financial support to Iran as part of the $300 billion "reconstruction and economic development" package, why would the "regional partners" have any interest in providing any support to a regime that only a couple of short weeks ago was lobbing ballistic missiles at the energy infrastructure - the lifeblood - of those regional partners?

The MOU reads like Witkoff and Kushner typed up whatever Iranian negotiators demanded and subsequently begged Iran to sign and I'm sure they were none too happy to oblige.

They’re not wrong. When the United States had Iran on the ropes in April, who would ever look at this deal and think it represents a negotiated outcome in any way beneficial to the supposed victor?

Trump may have been unknowingly speaking way more truth about Iran "begging for a deal" if this 14-point MOU is what he was referring to then.

In what world should a $300 billion plan for Iran's reconstruction and economic development be included in this MOU? Iran has been a designated state sponsor of terror since 1984 and the regime hasn't changed, nor did the United States significantly damage civilian infrastructure throughout the campaign. This has to be one of the more ridiculous items included in the deal.

Rubio looks miserable behind Trump at the G7 listening to Trump twisting himself into a pretzel trying to justify the deal to Peter Doocy.