What the US and Iran gain and lose from the Middle East agreement
The benefits, the risks, the open fronts and the big bet of the next 60 days
Who is the real winner in the US-Iran agreement that puts a temporary end to the war in the Middle East?
The agreement between the US and Iran was welcomed in Europe, while sparking discussions in the American Capitol (even among Republicans) as Tehran and Lebanon celebrate.
The war in the Middle East stops, but there are still several open issues that need to be resolved. These are issues that could lead to the collapse of the technical talks between Iran and the US, with the possibility of a new military conflict not being ruled out.
What is certain, according to analyses by Bloomberg and CNN, is that each side claims victory. Donald Trump insists that Iran lost, warning that if it does not comply during the 60-day ceasefire and does not reach a final agreement, the US will bomb targets on Iranian soil again.
On the other hand, Iran sends a message in all directions that it did not cross the 'red lines' it set in negotiations with the US, pointing out that it emerges victorious from the war in the Middle East. In a similar vein is the reaction of Hezbollah in Lebanon, as the peace agreement also includes the end of military operations on its soil. This development has sparked reactions in Israel, which has occupied significant territory, carrying out continuous airstrikes in Beirut targeting Hezbollah positions. But who is ultimately the winner?
What Iran gains from the agreement with the US
The biggest benefit for Iran is the prospect of economic recovery. The immediate lifting of sanctions on oil exports (i.e., the naval blockade on Iranian ports) and the restoration of free navigation through the Strait of Hormuz allow Tehran to make a strong comeback in international energy markets.
Oil revenues are crucial for the Iranian economy. With the peace agreement, the country gains the ability to dispose of oil reserves that have accumulated in floating storage.
It is estimated that exports could reach 2 million barrels per day, significantly higher than pre-war levels (i.e., before February 28 and the first coordinated Israeli and US attacks on Iran).
Equally important is the release of the Asian country's frozen assets. According to CNN estimates, the funds that remain frozen abroad range from $124 to $167 billion, while the first immediately available amounts are estimated at about $12 billion. The inflow of this money could provide critical liquidity to an economy suffering from inflation above 50% and chronic recession, which—combined with the ongoing oppression by the Ayatollah regime—has periodically driven citizens to the streets, sparking mass protests that are bloodily suppressed.
As Bloomberg reports, the reintegration of the Iranian banking system into international transactions creates conditions for increased trade and investment attraction, provided that the agreement is fully implemented.
What Tehran loses (if it adheres to the agreement)
The main price for Tehran is the strict commitments it undertakes to end its nuclear program (i.e., drastic reduction of enriched uranium quantity) and the increased international surveillance that entails.
Moreover, access to frozen Iranian funds is not automatic, as it depends on the faithful implementation of the agreement's terms. Practically, this is a future promise that, as has been proven many times, may not be kept.
At the same time, economic recovery is not guaranteed. International banks and investors remain cautious, fearing a possible reimposition of sanctions by the US, as well as the possibility of a new war in the Middle East. Israel faced strong pressure from Donald Trump to back down, both in Iran and in Lebanon, where the situation remains extremely fluid.
Even if significant funds flow into Iran, the deeply rooted corruption and weaknesses of the state apparatus of the mullahs' regime are expected to limit the impact of these investments on the real economy and the daily lives of citizens, who, besides severe economic difficulties, also face issues such as water scarcity.
America's gains from the agreement with Iran
For Washington, the most important gain is Iran's commitment to limit or end its nuclear program, a development that strengthens stability in the wider Middle East and reduces the risk of a new military conflict. This is the main quid pro quo that Trump offered to Benjamin Netanyahu, according to Reuters.
At the same time, the increase in Iranian oil production can boost global energy supply, helping to contain international prices and limit pressure on markets.
It is recalled that Donald Trump managed to break the Democratic 'blue wall' and win the US elections on the back of immigration and the cost of living. However, more than two years after his victory over Joe Biden, the majority of Americans are facing high living costs. Indeed, to keep fuel prices in check, the US had to release some of its strategic reserves.
The US also retains a significant leverage, as the full lifting of sanctions and the release of frozen Iranian assets are directly linked to Tehran's compliance with its commitments.
What the US and Donald Trump lose
The agreement also comes at a cost for the American side. The lifting of sanctions gives the Iranian regime access to enormous financial resources and strengthens its fiscal position, which could increase its regional influence.
The so-called 'Axis of Resistance' (Hezbollah in Lebanon, Hamas in Gaza, and the Houthis in Yemen) led by Iran has suffered heavy blows since October 2023, when Israel's war in the Gaza Strip began after the deadly attacks on Israeli kibbutzim and the outdoor music festival in the desert. Top senior leaders such as Hezbollah's Hassan Nasrallah, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, Ismail Haniyeh, and Yahya Sinwar, among others, are dead.
However, as confirmed on the battlefield, Iran's war machine remains strong, while new funds and oil revenues could end up with extremist organizations, despite the commitment included in the memorandum of understanding.
Republicans who disagree with Trump's policy focus on the political risk of the agreement, in case the 60-day technical talks do not resolve significant open issues, and a new war in the Middle East starts again.
In any case, the next two months are expected to be particularly difficult at the negotiating level, as the Middle East equation always includes the unpredictable factor of Israel. Hence, international analysts do not rule out the possibility that the historic agreement may end up being (yet another) lost opportunity for the Middle East.
