[This Iran war post will be short because I had tech issues that required attention, plus in this overly dynamic situation, a lot could change quickly. This post should be complete by 7:30 AM EDT]
As readers likely know, Israel is doing its best to sabotage the US-Iran “deal” and has scored an initial success, with the talks scheduled to start in Switzerland postponed and no new date set. Israel intensified attacks in Lebanon and then mounted more fierce strikes immediately after yet another ceasefire was announced. Axios is again peddling more fake news, claiming that Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi is going to Switzerland for negotiations when no such thing is happening.
However, it seems the “deal” was destined not to get off the ground quickly as the US had no doubt hoped, because oil cliff. Iran is holding the US fast to Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) language which as Iran parses it, sets other preconditions for talks beyond getting Israel out of the business of incorporating Lebanon into Greater Israel.
Finally, arguably the key issue. the status of the Strait of Hormuz given the negotiation dustup, remains unclear. Even if Trump musters up the will to come down on Israel, which the US can do, it seems likely to hold up the negotiation timetable by at least a couple of weeks as the cage match plays out. That brings the oil cliff even closer. As Richard Pape stressed, Iran’s negotiation power increases as the squeeze becomes imminent or even kicks in. The cost of having the Strait of Hormuz closed or throttled will become manifest, and lead to howls to Do Something.
Iran could elect to play a bit nicely by letting the ships bottled up the Gulf out, which will provide some additional supply and push out the arrival date of the energy cliff by an estimated week to ten days. But there is a huge furor in Iran over the official acceptance of the deal and then the US’ continuing failure to check Israel in Lebanon:
Many inside Iran are furious about the situation unfolding in Lebanon.
Experts, MPs, and ordinary people are calling on the SNSC members who approved the MoU (incl. Pezeshkian, Araghchi, Ghalibaf, and others) to respond to the breach of the MoU, namely the attacks on Lebanon. https://t.co/ssZuFESY82
— Arya Yadeghaar (Backup) (@AryJeayBackup) June 19, 2026
The Supreme Leader also added to the controversy by effectively saying on Twitter that he was not keen about the pact but agreed because the Supreme National Security Council backed it.
Iran is also imposing an insurance regime, free for the first 60 days, which can be assumed to justify higher charges than could be defended as environment fees. Mind you, I cannot imagine anyone would assign monetary value to these policies, save as a guarantee that Iran will not fire on them. Insurance is a right to sue the insurer to get paid in the event of a claim. Think anyone is going to want to pursue litigation in Iran?
Now to uppack some of these issues, first to the continued negotiation impasse:
BREAKING: Iran rejects Axios new claim that FM Araghchi is traveling to Switzerland Saturday for negotiations, saying no meeting or negotiations will take place and no delegation will attend now or in the future unless Article 13 of the MOU is fully implemented first, per Tasnim.…
— The Hormuz Letter (@HormuzLetter) June 20, 2026
There is no update on negotiations on Tasnim; PressTV instead has Pakistan’s interior minister travels to Tehran to discuss Iran-US negotiations, meaning the intermediaries are trying to get the talks back on track.
The hopium, it burns. From the top of Aljazeera’s live feed:
But see the summary:
- Pakistan and Qatar – mediators – are holding a series of meetings in Switzerland, Iran and Egypt and “the wheels of diplomacy” appear to be “back in motion” after a period of delay to the technical talks that were set to begin on Friday, according to Al Jazeera’s team on the ground.
- Iran’s deputy foreign minister has told Al Jazeera Tehran is “ready to move forward” on diplomacy with Washington, but the United States must ensure Israel abides by the terms of the deal to end the war.
Reader Johnnyme provided a summary of the Israel attacks that started a mere 5 minutes after the announcement of the latest Lebanon ceasefire:
Southern Lebanon hit by at least 12 Israeli strikes since ceasefire
At least 12 Israeli air strikes and ongoing artillery shelling have been reported in southern Lebanon since a ceasefire was reported to have taken effect at 4pm local time today (13:00 GMT).
Local time air strikes (UTC+3):
16:00 – Air strike on Kfar Reman
16:05 – Air strike on Nabatieh al-Fawqa
16:10 – Air strike on Kfar Sir
16:14 – Second air strike on Kfar Sir
16:17 – Air strike on the Nabatieh–Zibdin–Choukin area
16:20 – Second air strike on Nabatieh al-Fawqa
16:25 – Third air strike on Nabatieh al-Fawqa
16:25 – Air strike on Jabal al-Rafie
16:36 – Air strike on al-Rayhan
16:41 – Air strike on Adshit
16:41 – Air strike on Masir Habboush
16:45 – Third air strike on Kfar SirIn addition, continuous artillery shelling has been reported in Nabatieh and the surrounding areas since 16:48 local time.
And the savagery continues. A few of many sightings on Twitter:
Multiple Israeli airstrikes in south Lebanon and the Bekaa Valley over the past hour have left at least 11 people dead and over a dozen wounded.
According to preliminary figures, an intense airstrike targeting the town of Qanarit, located in the district of Sidon (Saida) killed… pic.twitter.com/VtiL6raO6V
— The Cradle (@TheCradleMedia) June 20, 2026
Iran is also telling the US in no uncertain terms that if it does not leash and collar Israel soon, it will. From DropSite News in Iran Warned Trump: If You Do Not End War on Lebanon, We May Strike Israel Without Warning:
If President Donald Trump does not force Israel to halt its escalating attacks on Lebanon, Iran told mediators it is prepared to suspend the agreement signed this week and launch retaliatory strikes against Israel, a senior Iranian official told Drop Site.
“Regarding Lebanon, we have warned both the mediators and the American side that if the regime fails to comply with the existing agreement, Iran will respond with substantial military measures without prior public notice,” said the Iranian official, who is not authorized to speak publicly. “Should the United States intervene, conditions particularly those related to the Strait of Hormuz could rapidly revert to a wartime environment.”
Forgive me for posting this entire tweet but the analysis from Shaiel Ben-Ephraim is valuable:
Israel’s Lebanon campaign is becoming one of the greatest strategic blunders in its history. It is rebuilding Hezbollah’s prestige, wrecking ties with Washington, and spending elite officers on a line with no purpose. Here is how:
1) Senior officers know the current fighting serves no useful aim. The IDF holds a line ten kilometers inside Lebanon that does not even control fire over northern Israeli towns. The army tells the cabinet “you decide, we execute,” with no real debate on objectives.
2) The cost is rising fast. Lt. Col. Dor Ben-Simhon, commander of the 52nd Armored Battalion, and three of his tank crew were killed near the Ali Taher ridge. He was the fourth commander of that battalion since the war began. His three predecessors were all wounded.
3) It is rebuilding Hezbollah’s prestige and influence. Iran understands the trap Israel set for itself and is spurring Hezbollah on. A group that was battered now gets to stand firm against the IDF, link Lebanon to the Gulf, and extract concessions from Washington through Israel. Israel is handing it a comeback story.
4) It is wrecking the US relationship. Trump keeps imposing ceasefires because he fears Israel will sabotage his Iran track. Vance was blunt: Israel should stay quiet and accept terms because its dependence on the US is nearly total. He hinted at consequences, possibly even arms limits.
5) The political story is collapsing. Netanyahu cannot sell success when the Iran campaign ended without its promised achievements and soldiers keep falling in Lebanon. The polls are starting to show it.
6) The leadership is unserious. One minister called for killing a thousand Lebanese per IDF casualty. Another mourned Ben-Simhon and got his first name wrong. Not one government representative came to the battalion commander’s funeral. Bennett did.
7) It is weakening the Lebanese government. The Aoun-Salam government staked its credibility on disarming Hezbollah through the Lebanese army, a plan that was popular outside Hezbollah’s base. Continued Israeli strikes hand Hezbollah its strongest argument: it will not give up its weapons while Israel keeps bombing. Every strike undercuts the one government actually trying to disarm it.
Bottom line: Israel set out to restore deterrence and secure the north. Instead it is restoring Hezbollah’s standing, draining its friendship with Washington, and dying on a line with no purpose. Worst of all worlds. This could end with Hezbollah back in [charge]
John Mearsheimer repeatedly and forcefully maintains that Trump will come down on Israel because he must shut the war down to save the economy. While this seems inevitable, will he suffer interim TACOs?
More on the obstacles to getting the discussions going: Iran is insisting that the US perform on its MOU commitments before it gets out of bed. From The Cradle:
Iran’s Foreign Ministry spokesperson, Esmail Baghaei, confirmed today that the meeting scheduled to take place in Switzerland has been postponed to a later date.
Baghaei said that, under Article 13 of the memorandum of understanding, negotiations on a final agreement can only begin once Articles 1, 4, 5, 10, and 11 are implemented and continue to be upheld.
Article 1 calls for the immediate and permanent end to military operations on all fronts, including Lebanon.
Articles 4 and 5 outline the reciprocal lifting of US and Iranian restrictions and the reopening of the Strait of Hormuz.
Article 10 commits the United States to immediately issuing waivers for Iranian oil exports and related services, while Article 11 requires Washington to make Iran’s frozen and restricted funds and assets fully available for use.
He added that consultations through mediators are ongoing and that Iran will announce a new date for the talks once the necessary conditions for negotiations have been met.
Iran insisting on Articles 4 and 5 suggests Iran will do its part to “open” the Strait of Hormuz. However, the delay in starting the negotiations and Iran requiring insurance (more on that below) may deter more ship operators. A lower flow than otherwise might be expected again works to Iran’s benefit.
In somewhat more encouraging news, Larry Johnson, in a talk with Mohammed Marandi and Nima, cited some signs of the US pulling equipment out of the theater. This did not seem large scale even if a step in the right direction. Again recall that Richard Pape stressed that de-escalation was not real until the US started moving out men and materiel:
In that discussion, Professor Marandi described the status of the Strait of Hormuz as not open or closed, with the result that traffic was still moving through but at a low level. Consistent with Marandi’s view
Strait of Hormuz over the last 24 hours.@WindwardAI counts 26 tankers.
It is evident that IRGC continues to throttle traffic flow.
Maybe I was optimistic in assuming 30-40. Let’s see.
Source: @MarineTraffic pic.twitter.com/qXXXHGX8Iv
— HFI Research (@HFI_Research) June 19, 2026
But even though some accounts are cheering that the Strait has just seen more ship transits than April, Iranian vessels dominate:
‼️🚨🇮🇷 Non-stop movement of Iranian oil tankers from the Strait of Hormuz
Iran is mainly active in the Strait of Hormuz and will likely remain so until an agreement is reached. pic.twitter.com/CcUHZNFmgb
— Visioner (@visionergeo) June 20, 2026
And since Iran is getting as many of its own tankers out as possible, which go to China and thus won’t help the energy squeeze in the US.
Contrary to US wishes, Iran is insisting transiting vessels use its channel, on the north side of the Strait of Hormuz. Recall that the US push for de-mining was to reopen the old navigation channel, more or less in the middle of the Strait of Hormuz (assuming that Iran actually did mine it as opposed to relying on ship operator fears to do the hard work):
⚡️BREAKING: Iran’s State TV announced that ships must follow the Sea Lane defined by Iran in the Strait of Hormuz
“If ships do not use the defined Sea lane, they may hit a mine, get into maritime accidents or come under an attack” pic.twitter.com/1uJVI45ILE
— Iran Observer (@IranObserver0) June 20, 2026
Lloyd’s List in Iran imposes mandatory insurance on ships transiting Strait of Hormuz, with fees likely to follow describes the new Iran insurance scheme, which I am sure will have heads exploding in the US. The coverage also requires vessels to use the northern route:
- Iran’s Persian Gulf Strait Authority is imposing mandatory, Iran‑approved insurance for all ships using the Strait of Hormuz — free for 60 days, but with fees likely afterward
- The move challenges a US-Iran agreement guaranteeing toll‑free passage
- Iran demands vessels use its preferred northern route, with threats of penalties for non‑compliance
- Shipowners, MEG states and IMO warn the policy could destabilise transit norms, while US officials emphasise keeping the strait open as negotiations continue on a long‑term framework
Again, this highlights a point we have made repeatedly: what the Iran and the US consider to be “open” are in different universes. From the article proper:
Despite a growing number of vessels now using a US‑protected southern corridor near the Oman coast, Iran insists that “passage is permitted only via the designated route near Larak Island”, referring to its preferred northern channel.
Enforce penalties for non‑compliance
“Any deviation… is strictly prohibited and will be treated as a violation,” the PGSA warns.
The authority says it is now the sole body responsible for processing transit applications and issuing permits, adding that it may “enforce penalties, revoke passage permissions, or take further legal action” for non‑compliance.
Lloyd’s List has requested comment from the PGSA.
Initial responses from several tanker owners using the southern route suggest that few believe the Iranian terms will provide a sustainable framework for vessels transits.
“It’s madness. This whole situation is a mess,” said one major tanker owner with ships currently exiting the strait…
Shipping companies, MEG allies, and oil majors have repeatedly warned that any transit fees in the Strait of Hormuz are unacceptable. IMO secretary‑general Arsenio Dominguez, who is working with Iran and Oman on a mechanism consistent with international law, has cautioned that allowing such charges would set a dangerous precedent for other strategic waterways. He confirmed receipt of the PGSA document and said discussions are ongoing.
US President Donald Trump said Tuesday that Hormuz “will be toll free during the first 60 days and thereafter”. Asked Thursday whether Washington would intervene to prevent future fees, vice-president JD Vance reiterated that the US believes “international waterways should be free of tolls”, but stressed that keeping the strait open is the overriding priority.
“The MOU contemplates that the Omanis, the Iranians, and the Gulf coast coalition together will figure out a proper security framework for the straits in the future,” Vance said, adding that the goal is to ensure the waterway is never again used as a chokepoint for the global economy.
Perhaps I am being unfair, but “unacceptable” regularly means “I am absolutely furious about a situation I cannot change.” Again remember that Iran is not a signatory to UNCLOS, which provides for “innocent passage” while Iran has long advocated “transit passage” rules, which allow for states bordering critical navigation channels to impose some restrictions.
Done for today! See you either tomorrow or Monday!
By
