By Eric Peters
Eric Peters Autos
June 19, 2026
It is hard to make sense of - to believe - that the "deal" supposedly reached between the United States and Iran means the war's over. It probably means the war is on pause, again. Israel hasn't agreed to anything, for one - and even if Israel did, Israel's word is worth about as much as (dare it be said?) Hitler's, with regard to promises of non-aggression. Peace in our time ? Maybe a kind of peace for a couple of weeks.
Perhaps this is too cynical a view. Hopefully so. Only sadists and sociopaths like war and want more of it. Because war costs lives - of innocent people who happened to be in the way of the sociopaths' war plans; those 17 Iranian girls killed on the first day of this war, for instance. Another cost, of course, is peace, which people who aren't sociopaths and sadists prefer over war. Maybe - hopefully - gas prices will come down and not just to less than they were a couple of weeks ago but to what they were before Trump decided it would be a fine idea to start a war. Maybe that will happen. If so, it will be a good thing for everyone - including Trump, who may avoid a mid-term Blue Tsunami that has the potential to wash him out of the White House.
But it all seems to good to be true.
Why would the leadership of Iran give up control over the Strait of Hormuz ? What is to be gained? is perhaps a better way to put it. If it is true that the Iranians have agreed to give this up, then they have given up a hard-won economic and (effectively) military advantage over the two countries - the United States and Israel, increasingly the same country - that have made it extremely clear they are not content to allow Iran to exist as a meaningfully sovereign state. The leadership of the United States and Israel (the same consolidated thing, effectively) want Iran to be reduced to something like Iraq has been reduced to; i.e., a province of the empire, nominally "independent" but in the same way that Vichy France was "independent" from the German Reich. Maybe the leaders of Iran were bought off. Money does talk.
Still, it is hard to believe that happened, for two main reasons. The first is the leaders of Iran cannot possibly be that stupid. Greed is one thing; stupidity is another. They have to know that they are marked men. That they are likely to go the way of Saddam Hussein or Muammar Quaddaffi (formerly of Libya) as soon as the U.S.-Israel decide (per Darth Vader) to alter the bargain. Surely they have seen the movie. There is also the religious aspect. The leaders of Iran are Muslims and (one assumes) believe in the tenets of their faith. That ought to make them wary of dealing with the states that regard Muslims as vermin to be exterminated. That are actively in the process of exterminating Muslims in Gaza and Lebanon. Does the Iranian leadership imagine it'll all be kumbaya from now on ? That Iran will be spared because it took the money?
The business about fissile materials - the part of the "deal" that will require Iran to turn over any "materials" it has and to give up any program it has to develop a nuclear deterrent - is even harder to believe that the Iranians have agreed to. Because it amounts to surrender. Without a nuclear deterrent, Iran will be attacked again by Israel and/or the United States. Ironically, the attack will (inevitably) come when Israel and its amen corner in the United States begins to kvetch (again) that Iran is "developing" nuclear weapons. This has been the go-to kvetch of Netanyahu since the '90s and it has served its purpose repeatedly. In other words, Iran is screwed even if it agreed to give up its right to develop a nuclear deterrent (the same right asserted by Israel but not admitted to be a fact by the United States) and abided by the agreement. Abiding by agreements made with the United States and Israel is no deterrent. Having the means to deter future attacks is the only deterrent.
Again, the Iranian leadership has to understand this - unless the Iranian leadership is dense and naive to a degree that is very difficult to imagine is possible in light of the events of the past six months.
More than likely, the "deal" will last just long enough for Trump to claim the Iranians broke it, so as to justify resumption of the war and (Trump probably is betting) gin up support for it, by dint of being able to re-frame the Iranians as the Bad Guys who didn't abide by the terms of the "deal."
Hopefully, this is all wrong. Because it will not be a good thing if this analysis is correct.
This article was originally published on Eric Peters Autos.