美伊协议详解：60天停火延期与霍尔木兹海峡重开

On Sunday evening US time or Monday morning Iranian time, the US and Iran announced that after more than a 100 days of on andoff conflict, the two sides have finally negotiated a memorandum of understanding orou to extend the fragile ceasefire and hopefully pave the way to a more permanent agreement. So in this video, we're going to explain what's actually in theou and whether it can really, in Trump's words, bring peace and security to the whole region. What comes next after overthrowing your government?

That was the dilemma facing Gen Z protesters from Bangladesh to Nepal to Madagascar following their revolutions. So, we explore the challenges they face turning protests to power in the latest issue of our magazine. That's just some of the 80 pages in the magazine because there's more to too long than you'd expect. Purchase your copy by clicking the link in the description. So, let's start by explaining what's actually inou. We don't have the full text yet, which is due to be published and signed later this week, but the broad outlines are pretty clear. In short, both sides have agreed to extend the ceasefire by 60 days, during which time the US will lift its naval blockade, which has been interdicting ships going in and out of an Iranian port, and apparently grant Iran a waiver to sell oil on the international markets. In exchange, Iran has agreed to gradually reopen the Strait of Omuz, which should provide a much needed relief to global energy markets. Although Iran will first have to remove any mines laid across the waterway, this new 60-day ceasefire extension will reportedly also include Lebanon, where Israel is currently fighting a war against Hezbollah. During these 60 days, the two sides are due to begin negotiations on thornier issues, including most obviously the question of Iran's nuclear program. According to both Iranian and US sources, the MOOU doesn't say much about sanctions relief or reconstruction, although there have been some reports that Iran might receive some or all of its $ 24 billion in frozen funds. And it looks like further sanctions relief will be conditional on progress being made in the nuclear negotiations. Trump has also claimed that theou obliges Iran never to seek nuclear weapons. But this is a rhetorical commitment Iran has made many times in the past, including on the first page of Obama's Iran deal. So, will thisou actually work?

In other words, can it really pave the way for a sustainable peace between not just Iran and the US, the only two countries expected to sign it, but also, in Trump's words, the whole region?

Well, maybe. But we see at least three big caveats worth mentioning. The first is that in a lot of ways theou just returns us to the pre-war status quo when the straight of was open and the US wasn't imposing a naval blockade. It doesn't really deal with the thornier issues that have plagued US Iran relations for decades like Iran's nuclear program or its proxy network. Rather it just defers these problems for future negotiations. This isn't necessarily a bad thing.Us like this can be a useful confidencebuilding measure towards a more sustainable agreement. However, the point we're trying to emphasize here is that the MOU itself is really very thin. It's basically a ceasefire extension and the vast majority of the difficult issues are coming later down the line. When pushed on this point by the New York Times a few hours after the deal, Trump admitted that if the two sides were unable to agree a new nuclear deal after 60 days, the US would restart its military attacks on Tyran or make the US quote the guardian of the Middle East in return for 20% of the region's revenues, whatever that means in practice. If the two sides can come some sort of deal, however, all the evidence suggests it will look very similar to Obama's deal, known as the JCPOA. In that call with the New York Times, for instance, Trump also claimed that Iran will be forever limited to enriching uranium at low levels that quote could never be used by the military. This sounds like the US dictating terms, but actually represents a significant concession on Trump's part given that his negotiating team had previously insisted on zero enrichment and is exactly where Obama ended up too. Specifically, the JCPOA permitted Iran to enrich some uranium up to 3.67% 67%. Enough to be used in a reactor, but well short of the 80 or 90% enrichment required for a warhead. Furthermore, and this is the second caveat on our list, even though it deliberately defers the more difficult topics for future negotiations, a fair bit of dispute is already emerging over theou itself. For starters, there's some confusion over the extent to which the straight will actually be reopened. In a Street Social post announcing the deal, Trump talked about a toll-free reopening of the Strait of Omuz, implying that the Iranians won't be able to charge tolls on passing ships, as they've been doing in recent months, forcing ships through the narrow passage between the Keshum and Lorra Islands. Trump then doubled down on this claim in his call to the New York Times, claiming that the straight would be quote permanently toll-free. It's hard to see how Trump can actually guarantee this though, given that the currentou only covers the next 60 days. Furthermore, multiple Iranian sources have suggested that they see things quite differently. In an interview with state media a couple of days ago, for instance, Iran's foreign minister Abbasaraji claimed that under theou future management of the waterway will be different from the past and that services will no longer be free. In practice, it sounds like Iran has nominally agreed not to impose tolls, but plans to instead charge quote unquote service fees in coordination with Aman. This sounds suspiciously like the rebranding of the existing toll system and would make it unlikely that maritime traffic through the strait would return to pre-war levels. Another point of contention within theou is Lebanon. Theou reportedly calls for a halt to hostilities across the region, including Lebanon, where Israel is fighting a war against Hezbollah. But it remains to be seen whether Israel will actually abide by this, given that Israel is not expected to be a signary to theou. And this is our third and final caveat. Israel. Even if Trump can somehow strongarm Israel into abiding by theou, previous experience suggests that it won't last. Trump has pushed Israel's Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu into ceasefires in the recent past, but these don't really seem to last, and Israel usually ends up resuming hostilities. This is exactly what happened early this month. After Netanyahu announced Israel will be escalating its war in Lebanon, Trump apparently called Netanyahu and told him to back down. Netanyahu originally exceeded, but after a furious domestic backlash, Israel restarted its war and has since bombed Beirut. The domestic reaction inside Israel has been even more furious this time. The leader of the opposition, Ya Laid, has already described theou as one of the most shocking failures of Israel's foreign and security policy. In this light, it's hard to see Israel sticking to theou, let alone a more substantial deal, if one can even be agreed. The latest issue of our magazine is out now. And if you want our best value ever, subscribing and using code summer26 gets you your first copy for as cheap as £4.99, as well as 20% off as long as you stay subscribed. I told you about one of the articles at the start of this video, but this issue is truly jam-packed with content from all around the world. Obviously, the headline section is our rundown of Trump's wars around the world, discussing all the different countries and regions that have faced Trump's military wrath, going nation by nation through our timeline and reaching the ultimate question, has Trump created the modern holy war?

From there, we dive into our regional sections, starting with the