Skip to content
You can now search across every topic, entity and event.What's new
European Tech Sovereignty
4AUG

Trump declares the Iran deal over

2 min read
10:16UTC

Trump called the interim Iran agreement over and a waste of time, while Tehran said US and Israeli actions had gutted it; neither side has formally withdrawn.

TechnologyDeveloping
Key takeaway

Trump calls the deal over and Iran calls it violated, yet neither has formally torn it up.

President Donald Trump said the interim agreement with Iran is "over" and "a waste of time dealing with them" after the 7 July strikes and Iran's retaliation, while adding that negotiations would continue. 1 The agreement in question is the 18 June Memorandum of Understanding (MoU), a 14-point ceasefire-track text the two sides were still negotiating in Doha last week. Trump's words have carried this message for 120 days; this time a signed licence revocation sits behind them.

Iran's foreign ministry said US and Israeli actions had "rendered key and fundamental elements of the agreement to end the war ineffective". 2 Chief negotiator Mohammad Ghalibaf called both the strikes and the oil-waiver revocation "major violations" of the MOU, putting the financial instrument alongside the kinetic one in Tehran's own complaint. 3 Spokesman Esmaeil Baghaei neither claimed nor denied the Al Rekayyat strike, instead invoking Clause 5 of the memorandum to assert an Iranian right to administer Hormuz routing . 4

Neither side has formally withdrawn from the memorandum both were negotiating in Doha, where Trump, Baqaei and Qatar's spokesman gave three contradicting accounts of the same talks and Doha itself billed the round as positive progress . Each capital is now retiring verbal tools for signed ones: Washington swaps Truth Social posts for a licence revocation, Tehran swaps anonymous IRIB framing for a named-spokesman treaty claim. The next Doha round stays paused with no firm late-July date fixed despite Pakistani expectations of one , so the memorandum is decaying rather than dying, and the 17 July licence cliff now arrives before any diplomacy resumes.

Deep Analysis

In plain English

The Memorandum of Understanding, or MoU, is a 14-point agreement reached on 18 June between the US and Iran that was meant to wind down the war, a written understanding rather than a ratified treaty. President Trump said the agreement was 'over' and 'a waste of time' after the day's strikes and oil-waiver revocation. Iran's foreign ministry said US and Israeli actions had made key parts of the deal ineffective, and Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, the speaker of Iran's parliament, called the day's events 'major violations' of the MoU. Neither side has formally withdrawn from the agreement in writing; both are simply saying, in different words, that it no longer functions.

Deep Analysis
Root Causes

The MoU has no enforcement mechanism written into its 14 points; unlike the JCPOA's IAEA verification architecture, it relies entirely on both governments' continued political willingness to reference it, which is why either side can call it ineffective without triggering a formal breach process.

Ghalibaf's move to frame the oil-waiver revocation and strikes together as violations serves a parliamentary function: the Majlis voted 221-0 in April to suspend IAEA cooperation, and casting the MoU as US-violated first gives hardliners in that body grounds to block future civilian-negotiated re-engagement without appearing to reject diplomacy outright.

What could happen next?
  • Risk

    Neither side formally exiting the MoU while both call it dead risks a legal vacuum where future strikes or sanctions carry no agreed reference point for de-escalation.

  • Precedent

    Ghalibaf's parliamentary framing echoes the Majlis's earlier unilateral IAEA suspension, suggesting Iran's legislature, not its foreign ministry, now controls the diplomatic off-ramp.

First Reported In

Update #149 · The first thing Washington signed on Iran: a revocation

ABC News· 8 Jul 2026
Read original
Different Perspectives
Germany (Bundeskartellamt)
Germany (Bundeskartellamt)
Germany's Bundeskartellamt declined to open antitrust proceedings against SAP, the company disclosed on 30 July, in the same fortnight the Commission's EUR 890m DMA fine against Google approached its 21 September compliance deadline. A German software champion cleared domestic scrutiny while an American platform faces enforcement, in the same regulatory season.
United States (USTR)
United States (USTR)
Washington's Section 301 investigation into EU digital enforcement, opened 24 July, had produced no Federal Register docket as of 4 August, even as Dell and 1,008 Nvidia GB200 NVL4 accelerators sit inside the EU's own sovereignty-branded MeluXina-AI build. The absent docket and the American hardware inside a European sovereignty project pull the same relationship in opposite directions.
UK government
UK government
The UK's Sovereign AI vehicle took a nine-figure equity stake in chip startup OLIX on 30 July, its fifth deal since April, while the Cabinet Office's 27 July fact sheet named no accounting officer for the GBP 1.1bn AI Hardware Plan. Whitehall is buying equity rather than capacity, inside a department mid-rename to Business, Innovation, Science and Trade.
Luxembourg government
Luxembourg government
Luxembourg is covering half of the newly disclosed EUR 80m contract value for MeluXina-AI, EuroHPC's Grand Duchy build, with Dell Technologies confirmed as supplying 1,008 Nvidia GB200 NVL4 accelerators, a hardware detail absent from the earlier project description. The disclosure means Luxembourg's national co-funding buys a facility built on American silicon under a European ownership badge.
European Commission
European Commission
The Commission activated its Article 101 fining power on 2 August while the Article 70 register it must keep current still showed a 26 September 2025 footer and blank rows for Denmark, Finland and Hungary. It issued no comment, though Article 70 puts the publication duty on Brussels, not member states.
China's Ministry of Commerce
China's Ministry of Commerce
Spokesperson He Yadong said on 16 July that Beijing and the Netherlands should let firms settle the Nexperia dispute through consultation, after a Dutch ministerial visit to Beijing. The conciliatory tone contrasts with the confrontational US trade response to the same fortnight's DMA enforcement.