On Sunday evening, Pakistan, the mediating country, announced that the US and Iran had agreed to a memorandum of understanding. The full contents of the agreement have not yet been officially announced, but the parties describe it as an end to the war.
Anders Persson, associate professor of political science at Linnaeus University, sees the agreement as a way for both sides to proclaim themselves victors: the US for reopening the Strait of Hormuz, Iran for having withstood attacks without the regime falling.
He sees three pitfalls in the talks going forward:
A big question is: is this the beginning of something lasting, or is it just a pause in the fighting? Trump says the deal is complete, but it's not. The most difficult question, about Iran's nuclear technology, is just postponed.
Israeli withdrawal?
The agreement also includes Israel's attacks on Lebanon. In recent months, Israel has repeatedly attacked the Iran-linked Shiite militia Hezbollah in Lebanon.
What we have heard from the various sides is that the fighting will also end in Lebanon. But will that also mean an Israeli withdrawal from the land it has occupied there?
Israel has said it doesn't want that, and then you encounter patrols already there. And let's say the text doesn't require an Israeli withdrawal, Lebanon won't accept that.
Fighting despite ceasefires
Israel and Lebanon, and Iran and the United States, have previously signed ceasefire agreements. Despite this, attacks have continued, several in the past week alone.
The third minefield is, how big of a deviation will this ceasefire withstand? We have previously seen that fighting continues, albeit in a more low-intensity manner. One question mark is what will happen if there is again a little shooting here and there, says Anders Persson.
