The United States and Iran signed a memorandum of understanding on June 18, 2026. Despite the official texts making no mention of the Gaza Strip, the Palestinian issue remained the hidden driver of the negotiation paths. This agreement comes at a time when declared American and Israeli efforts to overthrow the Iranian regime or completely dismantle its nuclear file have failed, leading to a state of frustration in Israeli political circles.
The Iranian political system has demonstrated a high capacity for cohesion and effectiveness despite repeated targeting of its military and political leaders and infrastructure. Tehran has succeeded in compensating for its missile and naval capabilities, and has even imposed conditions on the American side that end the economic blockade and open the door for full oil exports, thereby strengthening its position as an indispensable regional player.
The memorandum includes an American commitment to provide at least $300 billion for the reconstruction of Iran in cooperation with regional partners, in addition to the release of frozen assets. This economic shift would free Tehran from external pressures and provide it with a financial surplus that could be directed to strengthen its network of allies in the region, foremost among them the Palestinian resistance.
Iran closely linked the cessation of war on its territory with the de-escalation on the Lebanese front, which is considered an implicit American recognition of Iran's regional role. In return, Tehran did not make new real commitments regarding its nuclear file or the Strait of Hormuz, leaving the technical details for future negotiations to be held within the next sixty days.
A state of anger prevails within the Israeli entity, as the opposition and the ruling coalition considered what happened to be a resounding strategic failure of Benjamin Netanyahu's policies. Calls for Netanyahu's resignation are escalating after his military adventure failed to achieve its objectives, and even led to increasing international isolation for the occupation amidst ongoing genocide crimes.
The potential repercussions on the Gaza Strip oscillate between two contradictory scenarios. The first fears a decline in the priority of Palestine on the Iranian agenda in favor of internal development projects. This approach assumes that Iran's involvement in the regional stability system may push it to reduce its military support for the resistance, thereby allowing Israel to monopolize the Palestinian issue.
The second scenario, however, sees that the growing power of Iran and the failure of the 'New Middle East' project will strengthen the position of the resistance as the first line of defense against the Zionist project. According to this perspective, the improvement of Iran's economic situation will increase its ability to support its allies, especially after Tehran realized that direct confrontation with the occupation has become an unavoidable reality.
Sources reported that intense American pressure recently succeeded in preventing an imminent Israeli attack that aimed to invade the remaining areas in the Gaza Strip. This pressure comes as part of the Trump administration's attempts to make the memorandum of understanding with Iran successful and to pass the 'Peace Council' project in Gaza, away from comprehensive military escalation.
Netanyahu is currently racing against time to achieve any military accomplishment before the upcoming Israeli elections, but opinion polls indicate a significant decline in his popularity. Observers believe that any future Israeli government may be more realistic in dealing with the facts on the ground, to avoid direct confrontation with the new American orientations in the region.
Qatari, Omani, and Pakistani mediation played a crucial role in bridging the views between Washington and Tehran, which President Trump praised during the G7 summit. This mediating role reflects a regional desire to de-escalate and avoid a comprehensive war that would have disrupted global energy supplies and the security of waterways.
Iran's success in imposing a ceasefire in Lebanon as part of the understandings sends a strong signal to the occupation that the resistance fronts remain interconnected. This interconnectedness weakens Israel's ability to impose its conditions in Gaza, as Tel Aviv realizes that any uncalculated escalation could immediately reignite the northern front.
In the short term, Tehran may tend to prioritize de-escalation to ensure the implementation of the memorandum's provisions and benefit from the lifting of economic sanctions. However, this does not mean abandoning political constants towards Jerusalem and Palestine, but rather may be a strategic maneuver to rearrange cards and forces in the face of Israeli hegemony.
The region is undergoing a reshaping, as some Arab countries have begun to reconsider the feasibility of an alliance with Israel in light of the increasing risks of Zionist expansion. This shift may create new common ground between regional powers and the Palestinian resistance, restoring the Palestinian issue's importance as a center of stability in the Middle East.
In conclusion, the risks of escalation remain in light of the presence of an extremist right-wing government in Israel that is trying to thwart any American-Iranian rapprochement. However, the new realities on the ground indicate that the era of Israeli unilateralism in the region is over, and that Gaza will remain the difficult number in any upcoming regional equation.
The failure of American and Israeli goals to overthrow the Iranian regime has made Washington and Tel Aviv more distant and frustrated with the possibility of achieving the New Middle East strategy.
شارك برأيك
The US-Iranian Memorandum of Understanding: Gaza at the Heart of Complex Regional Calculations