Recent Items

Iran War: Vance Confirms Plan to Use “Deal” as Minsk-Type Pause to Restock Fuel (and Arms); US Ostentatiously Failing to Implement MOU, Seeking to Isolate Iran Over Strait of Hormuz Control

Posted on by

[Today’s Iran war post launched more or less complete. I do not expect an 8:00 AM EDT update unless there is big breaking news]

When Iran retaliated ferociously to the illegal and unwarranted war launched by the US and Israel on February 28, many commentators said that Iran’s objective was to inflict such a painful and humiliating defeat that the US would not think of attacking Iran for at least a decade. Iran recognized that it was of paramount importance to prevent a nation-state version of a “mowing the lawn” scenario. where the US and Israel launched periodic attacks on Iran to keep Iran in a weakened condition.

That has not happened. JD Vance is bragging that the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) was merely a device intended to bring Iran to heel, and if that did not work, it would still buy time for the US to restock its oil supplies and weapons. I confess that I had not wanted to believe1 Alexander Mercouris that Russian officials told him that they were concerned that Iran had fallen for a Minsk-type “deal,” intended simply to buy time so they could have another go. As we will describe below, the US is complying with the MOU only in areas that advance its interest, which here is to allow Iranian oil to go unfettered to buyers. It is not hard to imagine that the US plans to extend it beyond 60 days.

In the meantime, Iran seems stymied. A fresh report from supposed IRCG sources that Iran had force the grounding of a cargo ship was a fake; that vessel foundered in March. If this was indeed Iranian messaging, trying to flog a bogus story to demonstrate its Strait of Hormuz macho is an admission of weakness. 2

The open question is whether the oil will come out of the Gulf at a fast enough pace to prevent the US from falling over the much-reported (among real economy oil types) oil cliff. Both Lloyd’s List and Bloomberg describe the current level of oil leaving the Gulf as a “surge” even though the number of ship transiting is still about 25% of the pre-war normal. However, those transits included cargo ships, cruise ships, and even sailboats. The current vessel activity in the Strait of Hormuz is almost entirely VLCCs. So the level of tanker movement (and thus crude supply) looks to be higher than the 25% ship count would suggest.

Keep in mind the arrival date of any oil cliff was expected to be pushed back by virtue of already-loaded tankers in the Gulf getting to market, so some relief was baked in. The question is how much newly loaded crude is getting out of the Gulf. I have not seen good commentary on that yet. If readers have seen any, that would be very much appreciated.

Oil prices continue to fall, but experts have argued that paper oil price have become a vehicle of registering sentiment about the negotiations, and not the state of oil supply and demand. From the Bloomberg landing page:

From Oil Extends Drop as More Barrels Flow Through Strait of Hormuz:

  • Oil fell for a third day as flows through the Strait of Hormuz climbed and there were signs of progress in indirect talks between the US and Iran.
  • Brent for September traded below $71 a barrel, while West Texas Intermediate was around $68, after oil supply through the Strait of Hormuz reached more than 10 million barrels a day.
  • Total US stockpiles have fallen to the lowest levels since March 2025, with inventories excluding strategic reserves at around 1.2 billion barrels, after 12 straight weeks of declines.

Oil fell for a third day as flows through the Strait of Hormuz climbed and there were signs of progress in indirect talks between the US and Iran.

Brent for September traded below $71 a barrel, after sliding more than 3% in the previous two sessions, while West Texas Intermediate was around $68. Oil supply through the critical waterway has reached more than 10 million barrels a day, underscoring Tehran’s now-limited ability to halt shipping, a US official said, while President Donald Trump hailed progress in negotiations….

While total supply is still crimped, the United Arab Emirates’ exports have reached pre-war levels thanks to workarounds, and key US crude grades have slumped to trade at discounts as demand for American supply fades.

“Prices continue to drift lower as the gush of oil escaping the Strait of Hormuz coincides with SPR releases and curtailed demand, as flare ups between Iran and the US remain contained at least for the time being,” said Saul Kavonic, senior energy analyst at MST Marquee, referring to the millions of barrels of strategic petroleum reserves countries tapped to replace lost Gulf supply.

This seems to be the latest traffic update. Note Kpler indicates a mix of vessels, so the one breakdown I saw earlier this week, which showed inbound transits looking overweight VLCCs, may have been an anomaly:

But experts had said the key metric was new loadings in the Gulf, and they do seem to be increasing, although again, I have no idea if they are sufficient to merely delay or actually prevent going over the oil cliff:

Keep in mind that this level of activity is occurring despite the shipping community still deeming the Strait of Hormuz to be a high-risk region. From Agence France-Presse in Shipping employers and unions still consider Hormuz a war zone:4

Unions and shipping employers said in a statement on Wednesday that they will continue to designate the Strait of Hormuz as a warlike operations area until at least July 9, maintaining double pay for seafarers in the area despite the fragile truce.

The status only covers ships whose companies are signatories of the International Bargaining Forum (IBF)’s labor agreements – around 15,000 vessels worldwide, according to the IBF.

From Aljazeera’s live feed as of 10:00 AM EDT yesterday:

Ships still using Oman route through Hormuz despite Iran warnings

Vessels are continuing to pass through the Strait of Hormuz using the Oman-designated route despite Iran’s rejection of the lane and warnings to ships crossing outside routes approved by Tehran.

Maritime data reviewed by Al Jazeera showed 21 ships, including oil tankers, have used the Omani route since the first meeting of the joint Iranian-Omani Hormuz committee on June 29. The committee was set up to continue talks on managing navigation in the strait and related services.

Oman announced the shipping transit route last week saying it coordinated it with the International Maritime Organization to help ensure freedom of navigation through the strait.

The US is continuing to draw on the Strategic Petroleum Reserves, but at a lower rate than its recent 8-9 million barrels a day. The last week’s report claimed a 5.5 million but HFI Research called out a computation error and said it looked to be 6.4 million barrels.3 The inventories at Cushing increased modestly to 19.666 million barrels. Keep in mind the operating minimum is believed to be 18 to 19 million barrels. The system could conceivably function for a brief time with less.

And to the Vance admission of the US clever scheme to use the MOU to keep Iran from engaging in military operations while the US resupplies:

Former Lieutenant Colonel Karen Kwaitkowksi says in her discussion below with Mario Nawfal that the US could sufficiently rebuild weapons stocks so as to be able to pound Iran again after the midterms:

Kwaitkowksi and Nawfal also discuss Israel Defense Minister Katz’s threat to assassinate the new Supreme Leader, Mojtaba Khamenei, and whether they would make an attempt were he to appear at the extended funeral events for his martyred father starting this weekend. I do not see how this would work to Israel’s advantage given low weapons supplies, unless Israel intended to provoke such a massive retaliation as to give a thin justification for using nuclear weapons.

Moreover, it would seem unwise to act before Israel had cemented its control over US military and intel:

Once that happens, it would become impossible for the US to cut Israel off from SIGINT and other targeting information, which otherwise would be the fastest way for the US to bring Israel to heel.

Trita Parsi, in a new Substack post, reports that Iran is expecting an attack sooner, as in by October, due to Israel election timing:

Will Israel restart the war with Iran before the October elections? This is the consensus view emerging within Iran’s internal

national security debate over the past week….

…two developments stand out: the recent Israeli-Lebanese agreement and its impact on Hezbollah’s military posture over the coming months.

From Tehran’s perspective, the agreement hands Israel a significant advantage in any renewed war with Iran—one it lacked in February. By allowing Israeli forces to remain in parts of southern Lebanon, the deal appears to contravene the MOU while fundamentally reshaping the military balance. Israel’s continued presence in these strategic positions would make it far more difficult for Hezbollah to mount the kind of offensive operations that proved critical during the previous round of fighting.

That matters because, in February and March, the Iranians say they used only about 40 percent of their offensive capabilities against Israel, because Hezbollah carried much of the remaining burden. At the time, pundits in the West were debating why Tehran hit the UAE harder than it did Israel….

Netanyahu’s motivations are clear. Beyond his long-standing desire to use American force to subjugate Iran to Israeli domination and achieve a regional balance favourable to Israel, he now also has stark political and personal reasons to restart the war.

The MOU has come at a steep political cost for Netanyahu….

And of course, if he loses the elections, he will likely spend the next few years in jail, as he will lose his immunity as Prime Minister and face trial over corruption charges….

From Tehran’s perspective, there are three plausible scenarios. The first is that the White House is aware of Israel’s plans and helped broker the Lebanese agreement in part to facilitate them. The second is that Washington is unaware of Netanyahu’s intentions but would nonetheless come to Israel’s defense—and perhaps even join the offensive—once Netanyahu resumes the war. The third is that the administration is caught by surprise, chooses not to restrain Israel, but also refrains from direct military involvement in the conflict.

Tehran does not believe Israel’s advantage in Lebanon will prove decisive. Iranian officials remain confident they can impose severe costs on Israel and deny it its broader strategic objectives. But a renewed war could still achieve Netanyahu’s most immediate aim: killing the MOU.

The US is trying the GCC in opposition to Iran over the Strait of Hormuz. Note that even though these nations are justifiably angry with the US for launching a stoopid war that cause them a lot of damage, at the same time, they do not want to become hostages to Iran by conceding control of the Strait. From Middle East Eye’s live feed:5

Centcom leads regional security dialogue with Middle East military officials

US Central Command has led a “security dialogue” alongside Bahrain’s defence forces with military officials from across the Middle East.

Representatives from Egypt, Jordan, Kuwait, Lebanon, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Syria, the United Arab Emirates and Yemen discussed “enhancing defence collaboration across the region”, Centcom said in a post on X.

Centcom Commander Admiral Brad Cooper said the discussions “underscored our shared commitment to regional security and stability”.

Oman and Iran are tying to agree on a Strait of Hormuz scheme but are still at odds on whether payments are obligatory. Mandatory payments would violate UNCLOS and would open up Oman to ICJ lawsuits if it participated. From DropSite on Twitter:

This idea came up on Twitter earlier this week, but again notice the critical “voluntary” part:

⭕️ The New York Times: Iran and Oman are moving forward with a proposal to collect fees from ships transiting the Strait of Hormuz, despite U.S. objections, citing Iranian and diplomatic officials.

The Times reports:

🔹Oman has reportedly proposed a system modeled on the Straits of Malacca and Singapore, where shipping companies “voluntarily” contribute to navigation and safety services.

🔹Iranian officials, however, say the payments would be mandatory.

🔹The White House and Secretary of State Marco Rubio has said Washington opposes monetizing passage through the strait “whether it is called a fee, toll, or donation,” while Iran insists the waterway will not return to its prewar status.

The New York Times reports on another fresh US move to curry cooperation, in U.S. Resumes Dollar Transfers to Iraq After Monthslong Suspension.

So far, Iran is only administering wet-noodle lashings in response to these US efforts. Admittedly the US has not gotten far enough to justify harsher action:

Iran does not seem to be succeeding in holding its boundaries in negotiations. See this headline from Aljazeera’s landing page yesterday:

It also does not appear that Iran had yet secured the release of the first $6 billion of Iran’s frozen assets. From Arya Yadeghaar on Twitter:

Iran’s delegation, led by senior negotiator Gharibabadi, finished talks in Doha about implementing the MoU.

– Iran, Qatar, and Pakistan held 2 trilateral meetings.

– Iran complained about US violations, especially:
• Continued war in Lebanon
• US military buildup in the region
• Threatening & interventionist statements by US officials

– Violations of the MoU will be formally documented, reported, discussed, and decided on.

– Iran will spend part of the initial $6 billion on goods needed by Iran, purchased according to Iran’s announced needs and made available to Iran.

– No direct meeting took place between the Iranian & American delegations in Doha (they were indirect).

I read this as Iran blinking on Iran having maintained that it will have unrestricted authority as to how to spend the frozen assets.

Admittedly Iran’s hands appear somewhat tied, as we described yesterday, under the terms of the 2023 Biden agreement (that is the $6 billion being wrangled over now) which set the transfer as being for humanitarian purposes. This entry from the Aljazeera live feed seems consistent with our reading:

Iran raises ‘US violations of obligations’ at Doha talks

We have more on the technical talks that just wrapped up in Doha.

Iran’s Deputy Foreign Minister Kazem Gharibabadi told state media the Iranian delegation held two rounds of meetings with mediators Qatar and Pakistan…

The second meeting, with Qatari officials and the country’s central bank, addressed the release of some $6bn in frozen Iranian funds. According to Gharibabadi, the talks covered issues related to the cost of part of the initial $6bn, with an agreement that Iran would use the funds to buy goods according to its “declared needs”.

Another recap from Arya Yadeghaar on Twitter on how the MOU discussions look from an Iranian vantage:

Status of the end-of-war MoU — Day 13

• Iran’s oil sanction relief has been implemented, and part of the money from oil sales has been transferred to Iran’s central banks.

• Iranian ships are passing through the naval blockade.

• None of Iran’s frozen funds have been released so far. (Violation of clause 11)

• The Omani-US corridor in the Strait of Hormoz is active. (Violation of clause 5)

• US forces & equipment in the region are increasing, and the USS Boxer has also been sent toward West Asia. (Violation of clauses 2 and 9)

• US officials continue to threaten Iran. (Violation of clauses 1 and 2)

• War & occupation in Lebanon are continuing intensely. (Violation of clauses 1 and 13)

• The US Vice President (JD Vance) described the goal of the MoU not as ending the war, but as preparing for what will happen next (war). (Violation of clauses 1, 2, 13, and 14)

• The Persian Gulf Cooperation Council denied any investment for Iran’s reconstruction. (Violation of clause 6)

Done for today! I plan to take tomorrow off.

_____

1 Readers have been taking umbrage in comments at my contesting their readings of events and documents in an Iran-favoring way, as in letting their sympathy for Iran skew their perspective. I did exactly that when I initially rejected the Russian assessment via Mercouris. Hopium and black/white thinking are poor foundations for analysis.

2 Hormuz Letter is generally accurate when quoting media sources, so it looks as if Iran did try to depict a ship grounded months ago as the result of fresh IRCG action. I do not see this story on the PressTV English site:

And per Aljazeera’s live feed:

TankerTrackers says grounded Hormuz tanker tied to Iranian oil magnate

As we’ve been reporting, Iranian state media has reported that a foreign cargo ship using a “US-suggested route has run aground” in the Strait of Hormuz.

Now, TankerTrackers.com, a maritime traffic monitor, says the ship had “actually been stuck in this same spot since March”.

It identified the vessel as Arista, and said that while the ship is Comoros-flagged, it is part of an operation managed by Iranian oil magnate Mohammad Hossein Shamkhani, the son of the late senior Iranian security official Ali Shamkhani.

3 Also keep in mind reader ilsm’s observation: “Although drawing conclusions on inventory change from one observation is not wise. Lesson learned in my youth managing inventories.”

4 Another traffic indicator: local news confirmed that 10 of 11 Thai vessels in the Gulf have departed, with the last one collecting cargo before its planned exit.

5 We were remiss in not including a key bit of an earlier fakUS muscling of the critically important Saudis, in our post yesterday:

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Subscribe to Post Comments
130 comments

  1. Carolinian

    Kwaitkowksi is good and was on one of Judge Nap’s last shows before he takes a break. She talked about why so many commentators on that Nap show are below flag or general officer rank. In short, says she, the ruling officers are all and especially after Trump fully fledged members of the military/industrial/Israel/complex. She says Hegseth is incompetent but a rabid Israel supporter which, along with loyalty to Trump, accounts for his continuing employment. Add in this new initiative to fuse the US and Israeli militaries (with Israel in charge) and what we the public are dealing with is not so much Versailles as the Quisling Club. America 250 is now ruled by money rather than votes unless the latter can overwhelm the former in short order.

    Reply ↓
    1. KLG

      The only retired military officers who should be considered trustworthy (after verification) are O-6 and below (Colonel in the Army, Air Force, Marines; Captain in the Navy). They maxed out at that (relatively high) level because they can tell the truth as it exists on the ground. General officers in a peacetime (sic) world are politicians on the make first, with eyes on the prize of a high-paying sinecure at General Dynamics or equivalent. They are military leaders fifth, maybe sixth, despite having all the tickets punched to get those stars.

      Reply ↓
      1. Carolinian

        Those of us with long memories think back to Carolinian William Westmoreland and Vietnam. Later my brother saw him walking across the road in Charleston and says he had the urge to run over him.

        It’s worth noting that the web gets the colonels and the MSM network shows the ex generals

        Reply ↓
      2. ilsm

        I agree.

        In my years examples of meritocracy among military officer advancement were very rare. Sponsors, politics, and caught at no mistakes!

        I remember many more excellent colonels who retired as colonel.

        Pray for peace.

        Reply ↓
        1. jsn

          Pray for some sort of organization of ex colonels to resist the Israeli takeover: active duty appears bought and paid for.

          Reply ↓
      3. Ex-PFC Chuck

        Then there’s the wisdom of the early 20th century German General Kurt von Hammerstein-Equord:

        “I distinguish four types [of officers]. There are clever, hardworking, stupid, and lazy officers. Usually two characteristics are combined. Some are clever and hardworking; their place is the General Staff. The next ones are stupid and lazy; they make up 90 percent of every army and are suited to routine duties. Anyone who is both clever and lazy is qualified for the highest leadership duties, because he possesses the mental clarity and strength of nerve necessary for difficult decisions. One must beware of anyone who is both stupid and hardworking; he must not be entrusted with any responsibility because he will always only cause damage.

        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kurt_von_Hammerstein-Equord

        Reply ↓
        1. Roland

          I believe that expression long predates Hammerstein-Equord (1933). Max Hoffman, in his memoirs, written just after the Great War, says something similar.

          Reply ↓
    2. JMH

      I emailed my congress critter less than an hour ago to ask, as politely as I could manage, if Congress had lost its individual and collective mind with the Israel-USA military merger insanity or was it Congress obeying its master’s voice. After all AIPAC money, Israel supporting money, does appear to own Congress. I suppose some are sincere in their support of the Israeli state and are able to look away from genocide in Gaza, ethnic cleansing and land theft in the West Bank, aggressive war against Iran coupled with an assassination campaign, aggressive war against Syria and Lebanon, not to veiled threats that Turkiye would be next, and Minister Katz’s threat to the new Supreme Leader of Iran. I have been inveighing against the deliberate destruction of everything in Gaza and the wholesale killing of its people. Self-defense? You jest. An eye for and eye? Only if thousands of eyes for each one. I called it genocide long before it was called so buy international institutions. Can the idea of losing a seat on the gravy train in the November election outweigh the cash in hand? Good question. What is the venality ratio among our elected representatives and their lordly colleagues at the other end of the building?

      Reply ↓
  2. The Rev Kev

    With the increased number of ships going in and out the Strait, I would be interested to know what the situation is as far as insurance is concerned. In the end, nobody took up Trump’s $40 billion insurance scheme as they knew that he would never pay out but stiff those shipping companies for sure. So have the big insurance corporations like Lloyds given them a special insurance cover to go through the Strait or are all these ships skinny-dipping their way across insurance-wise?

    Reply ↓
    1. Yves Smith Post author

      I have not seen any concerns on Lloyd’s List. Rates may be high but as you can see from the transits, ship operators are willing to pay.

      I have been reading for a while, save for early in the war, that the big obstacle was safety, not insurance. A lot of YouTubers kept banging on about insurance after that was the barrier. One of my many frustrations with YouTube consensus opinion.

      Reply ↓
  3. Adam1

    The level of delusion in Washington and Israel is unreal. So we’re going to refill oil inventories (but not likely strategic reserves) until after the elections and then we’re going to start shooting again. Do they really believe we’re going to end up with a different outcome the next time? If I’m Iran, next time I start with the Gulf energy infrastructure & desalination and let Mr Market rain on the parade. There is still plenty of time to turn Trump into his feared Herbert Hoover II.

    Reply ↓
    1. lyman alpha blob

      Perhaps Iran is waiting to top off its own missile inventories. Otherwise I don’t know why they are putting up with this MoU nonsense. It was clearly a ruse from the very beginning to keep Iran from retaliating against Israel for bombing Beirut. Israeli defenses must have been in very bad shape at the time for Trump to agree to the MoU and make the kind of statements he did about Iran keeping missiles, etc. Iran should have taken advantage of that rather than backing down. The world would have thanked them.

      Reply ↓
      1. SeventyTwoTrillion

        To be fair to the Iranians, the US being able to meaningfully refill its munitions stockpiles within the next few months seems impossible to me based on current production rates, and a lot of radars have already been destroyed and those won’t be replaced for years. Meanwhile, the Iranians might be looking at their current production rates and calculating that if the Americans want to start it up again, they’ll be even more prepared than the first time.

        Sure, it is now undeniable that Iran is getting Minsk’d now, even the American government has freely boasted about it, but it’s not as if Minsk left Russia in a place of inescapable weakness and the US+Europe in a place of overwhelming strength. Delaying tactics can backfire on those doing the delaying.

        But I definitely agree with Yves in that we have to be even more careful than usual to try and assess the situation as it is, and not as we hope or theorize it might be. Whatever the reason, Iran is losing a lot of its leverage, and it might find it harder to reassert it as the global economy continues to adjust under pressure. The balance of power hasn’t yet shifted to the point where I would say Iran is *losing* now, but it’s getting awfully close to median line – we might be there within a week or two. If Iran continues to let the US confidently step over its red lines without a response, and let its politicians humiliate themselves by “definitely-absolutely-totally not going to Qatar to talk to US diplomats, I *swear*!!! We won’t buy their agricultural products! Probably! Maybe!” then I do start to wonder if there might soon be civilian unrest inside Iran.

        I do not sense that Iran is currently “negotiating with total distrust of the enemy”. If they were, not a single Iranian diplomat would hopped into a plane bound to Switzerland until the Israelis had fully withdrawn from Lebanon, just like they were ostensibly promised would happen by the US in return for them holding fire. They therefore must have *some* trust that the US was willing to yank the leash on their mutt, which is a trust that has been completely unearned, because it’s something they haven’t meaningfully done a single time in the last 3 years. The only times it’s apparently occurred is to stop Israel from doing something that would have been very counterproductive for it – “Grr, I would have *totally* beat you up just now if my friend didn’t hold me back!”

        Reply ↓
        1. ChrisFromGA

          Vance seems to have selective amnesia as well. Last I checked, China still has its boot on the neck of the US with regard to critical minerals and rare earths needed to rebuild all those expensive weapons systems. Projects to remove the US dependency on these supply chains are in progress but will take years, not months, to bear fruit.

          And don’t overlook the dysfunctional Congress that cannot even pass a FISA extension or a defense supplemental. The House is in total chaos and unable to do anything other than run for the bus. I read on Politico that there are only 24 legislative days scheduled between now and the mid-terms. It is not a given that anything will pass other than a CR to punt funding the government into December.

          Reply ↓
          1. Peter Steckel

            The Marines just “accepted” six F-35s with no radar installed.

            https://www.aviationtoday.com/2026/06/25/six-f-35bs-delivered-without-radars-thus-far-program-director-says/

            As I understand it, the Chinese suppliers will not export a critical component to the West and this has hamstrung the production of said radars. Even more interesting, the article points to the fact that of approximately 800 plus F 35s in the US, only 25% are mission capable. (Note, that could be referring to the 1,300 in circulation in the world, with an unknown percentage in the US mission capable). This is going to get spicy over the next couple of years.

            Reply ↓
            1. ilsm

              USAF has been accepting ballast in nose cones for some time.

              I do not know whether the issue is lack of Gallium Nitride chips or the radar itself is not ready for prime time.

              A year or so ago USAF refused to accept F-35’s bc it needed a SW update to be able to modify more in future and Lockheed did not have the SW update.

              F-35 is expensive disarmament.

              None of the recent issues fixes deep problems with reliability and maintainability (repair accuracy).

              Good thing F-35 does not have a complex sewage system like USS Ford!

              Reply ↓
            2. The Rev Kev

              Probably not the first time this has happened and certainly not the last. Without those radar sets, they are not that great at all at the best of times. And since only about 25% are operational at any one time, this means that if you hear that the US has deployed 100 F-35s to the Middle east, that only about 25 will be able to get off the ground.

              Reply ↓
              1. ISL

                More interesting is the decrease in readiness, which has been significant after a few weeks of operations. It could be poor engineering (F-35-is a late 1970s Chrysler – immediately starts falling apart once driven), or it could be lack of replacement parts, which need rare earths, or both (My SWAG).

                Reply ↓
            3. Maj. Affective Disorder, ret.

              What’s the point of installing radar in an aircraft that will never be turned-on? US munitions are networked with the core theatre-wide sensors, these massive arrays on the ground, on the sea, in the air, and in space. If the AIM-260 JATM missile travels 200km in a bvr engagement with another aircraft, the missile basically enters space, traveling without drag, before returning to the atmosphere, the relevant targeting data for that missile won’t be sourced from the little AESA panel in the nose of a stealth aircraft.

              And without an AESA radar installed, the aircraft’s radar cross-section is significantly smaller, given the nose must remain radar-permeable if a radar is installed. Historically, a stealth aircraft configuration lacks a radar. Recall the F-117 stealth aircraft never had a radar installed, either.

              Reply ↓
        2. Yves Smith Post author

          To your claim about munitions, as we indicated. Colonel Kwaitkowsi volunteered otherwise, but she may be contemplating a more limited “excursion” than you do.

          Reply ↓
          1. ilsm

            I think Col K is assuming that precision munition are coming from existing U.S. stock pile.

            For example, JASSM ER has less than 400 on order this year. It is produced on one facility and could ramp up to 800 per year. USAF the lead service is looking for a second source.

            The total buy for JASSM family was 6000 missiles.

            For comparison the U.S. claimed to have effected 30000 strikes over the 40 days. I assume some strikes were from a single sortie.

            I think Hegseth is arm wrestling munitions from other commands to arm CENTCOM.

            Kidding aside ramping up production rates posses supply chain, tooling and equipment, and finding managers and technicians.

            I know a couple of managers who would have nothing to do with sidelining their career on short term problems.

            Reply ↓
    2. Mikel

      Without a strategic reserve, prices can be raised on the US consumer. It’s a huge country where people (compared to many other countries) do lots of driving. Get rid of it and just think of the $$$ that oil companies can make during “constant crisis capitalism”.
      Even being able to temporarily raise prices by obscene amounts is billions in their pocket.
      If it was a priority for refilling, the sources outside the Persian Gulf exist.

      Reply ↓
      1. ilsm

        All the barrels drawn from SPR since Feb 2022, about 70 million had been resupplied by Feb 2026

        Drawing from SPR has kept WTI suppressed. Filling SPR will likely raise WTI futures!

        In any event SPR is now ~325 mbbl (top of head about ~300 mbbl down from Feb 2022), and no indication the draws stop. The draws are keeping input to US refineries balanced!

        As Yves states two issues on SPR: how much of volume is recoverable from salt domes and stock data may not be accurate!

        In my experience, emergency supply action result from data not accurate.

        On a brighter note, demand destruction, recession, AI bust, or fuel saving lockdown could drive WTI future into the basement.

        Reply ↓
        1. Mikel

          Some in the sector don’t like government having too much (or what they consider too much) influence on prices.

          Reply ↓
  4. JohnH

    A lot of “givens” are now in question now that the Strait is somewhat open and oil prices have plummeted at least temporarily–
    1) Insurance rates would stifle resumption of flow through the Strait
    2) Production would be seriously limited due to shutting wells down
    3) Loading of vessels would be seriously impacted
    4) A supply cliff was imminent
    5) The Bab al Mandeb served as a good example of flow being impacted
    6) That the US was running low on munitions
    7) That the war had seriously impacted the global economy
    8) That the flow of information about oil supply is any good

    Of course, it is still too soon to tell. And this is not to deny that there were annoyances and inconveniences, but the impacts may have been greatly exaggerated.

    Will the US soon have proved that closing the Strait is not Iran’s “nuclear weapon” after all? Will Iran have to develop a real one?

    Reply ↓
    1. KD

      What saved the oil markets is the fact that China stopped buying 6 million barrels per day, not the US, not Iran. The fact that you had a lot of floating inventory in the Gulf trapped that suddenly went to market causing oil prices to fall does not change the inventory problem. The SPR draw is going to be over by end of August at the current draw rates, assuming you can draw down to 242 million barrels. So there has to be enough shut in production in the Gulf re-opened to replace SPR draws before the end of August if the oil market stays balanced. Plus, US gas stocks are at historically low levels due to exports, and crack spreads are at record highs, which means we should see gas prices move up, and crude demand to feed refineries.

      It would be surprising if Brent stays where it is through the summer, and unless the spice starts flowing from the Gulf reliably before the end of August, there is a real cliff. Further, Chinese demand is coming back as China just authorized a 33% increase in refined export products, so the Chinese refineries are going to have to start purchasing again. In fact, I saw something on Saudi just getting 3 VLCC’s through, and I believe that they are headed to China.

      Another point, we have been talking about Strait open or Strait closed. If Turkey, Egypt, Pakistan, Saudi and Qatar can work something out with Iran governing Hormuz, and agree to embargo say the US/Israel/EU until they lift their “illegal” sanctions regime against Iran, this would keep China and SE Asia supplied, probably hurt America but be extremely painful to Israel and the EU (who are weaker and probably easier to get to defect). Further, Iran can target still Kuwait and Bahrain and potentially the UAE (rumor has it that they paid off Iran to stop hitting them). This would be pretty bold, but if the Gulf/Arab states could get concessions on Hormuz, it might be worth their wile. Everything is in freefall right now, so its a possible configuration.

      I’m wondering if there is a betting pool on whether we have some more kinetic action after close of market today.

      Reply ↓
      1. ilsm

        I checked EIA refinery utilization rate. it is running 96%+. With (small) east coast refineries a bit lower.

        A “problem” with a gulf coast refinery could be troublesome.

        Reply ↓
      2. ChrisFromGA

        Remember when Bessent said sanctions would work? Now those Chinese “teapot” refiners are running at full steam.

        Hence my trademark line: The lying liars who lie, lie, lie! ™

        (Patent pending)

        Reply ↓
    2. Cocomaan

      A lot of oil analysts got to sell research saying that the Hormuz closure would be instant destruction for the past two decades, so they got something out of it.

      Reply ↓
  5. eg

    I don’t get it. What makes the US believe it can bomb Iran into incapacity to interdict the Strait of Hormuz when it couldn’t even accomplish this against Ansarallah?

    Reply ↓
    1. jefemt

      Seems to me the thinking is… it doesn’t matter, there is no downside. We win, we take the spoils, such as we determine them. We lose, the MIC wins, and all of our ‘investment’ shorts, front -running, and rigged betting makes us a sh*t-ton of moolah as Mister Market wobbles and yo yo’s.

      I will tell who the yo-yo’s are…. I wish Americans would wake up, open their cans of Whoop-ass, and kick all these mofos to the curb- starting with AIPAC, Israel, and the elected and appointed minions in DC.

      whew! ….and yet I still don’t feel better about things…

      Reply ↓
      1. Offtrail

        Too many ordinary Americans deeply believe that we are the indispensable nation the rest of the world needs and wants for leadership. Plus, we are the goodest.

        Reply ↓
    2. SeventyTwoTrillion

      I’m not familiar enough with the structure and hardiness of Ansarallah in practice to comment on how and why Prosperity Guardian failed, but I do wonder if it wasn’t so much that the US *couldn’t* bomb them to the extent that they were forced to give up on blockading the Red Sea, but more that the munitions expenditure wasn’t worth the projected cost of having the Red Sea be inaccessible because shippers could go around Africa instead?

      To be clear, it *was* still a defeat for the US, but more in the sense that the effort that would need to be expended to achieve their goals would have been too prohibitive to bear, which is how guerrilla groups win a quite a lot of the time: make your enemy do the cost-benefit analysis of meeting your demands versus spending all the required money, manpower, and resources to destroy you, and have them conclude that just letting you have most of your demands would be easier. The Algerian War of Independence comes to mind. This is especially true if you just let them ostensibly have independence, but economically dominate them later anyway, like France’s approach to West Africa.

      Whereas, Iran controlling Hormuz is a much bigger deal because there’s not really an alternative route out, at least not yet, and taking out Iran would remove the single largest source of anti-American power in the Middle East and thereby leave in you charge of most of the world’s oil and gas supplies, combined with your control over Venezuela, Nigeria, etc.

      Reply ↓
    3. Yves Smith Post author

      Iran has to attack or otherwise violate the territorial rights of Oman to control the Strait on a lasting basis. Oman is REALLY not willing to violate its obligations under UNCLOS.

      In addition, Iran is making clear it does not want to go back to a hot war. It is WAY overdue for a kinetic response to the Israeli pulverizing of southern Lebanon.

      Reply ↓
      1. Hands Off the Loot

        How realistic would it be for Iran to close only their side of the Strait? If crossings were only allowed through the Oman side, would that still drive the economy off the cliff, just slower than stopping all crossings? I wonder if Iran could achieve some of their goals just by doing that, rather than antagonizing Oman and the rest of the Gulf states (at least, much more than they already have).

        Reply ↓
        1. Yves Smith Post author

          I don’t really know.

          I have seen it claimed that 40 a day is the max, but if they were all VLCCs. that would be way more than enough for energy transits. A VLCC did get through so the channel is deep enough. Food and fertilizer would suffer.

          Moreover, I suspect you could get more through if they were spaced very tightly (I have seen running them end to end mentioned, so this is not my invention)

          Reply ↓
      2. ISL

        I wonder if there is some reason for not having a kinetic response due to the funeral of the late Ayatollah. If so, the day after will be a big signal on the nature of things. Perhaps some in the commentariat know if there are special and relevant edits or principles.

        Reply ↓
    4. Mikel

      My take:
      The US wasn’t trying to win a war against Ansarallah. They wanted to reduce the number of hits Israel was taking.

      Reply ↓
  6. Steve H.

    Today is the halfway point between the start of the war (Feb 28) and the day after midterm elections (Nov 4).

    The last time an Ayatollah was buried, millions of people gathered with riots of grief. Day one of the burial coincides with the 250th anniversary of the founding of the US (July 4). The contrast will be like the cross-cutting scene in The Godfather, Life v Death.

    The casket will then be taken from Iran to Iraq. Iraq is 61% Shia. The Gulf States have enormous numbers of Shia workers, compared to minority elites. Expect disruptions inside Iraq and perhaps beyond.

    > Both Lloyd’s List and Bloomberg describe the current level of oil leaving the Gulf as a “surge” even though the number of ship transiting is still about 25% of the pre-war normal.

    From Brett Erickson on Twitter:
    >> A rate of ~3.5M barrels per day being exported. Iran’s “normal” rate of export for context is ~1.7M/day.
    >> 55M barrels in onshore oil storage that can be exported, and assuming they continue to do so at a rate of ~3.5Mbpd, that carries them favorably for ~16 more days
    >> What happens if, by July 15th, the United States still hasn’t released any of Iran’s frozen assets?

    There is a surge, in the rate of exports. About July 15, there is no more advantage for Iran in holding to the MOU, with a buffet of violations to cite.

    Should be quite a week. Touch grass and get extra cash.

    Reply ↓
    1. hemeantwell

      Thanks for bringing up the funeral. It must be affecting Iranian decisions re retaliating against Israeli ceasefire violations, but I’ve seen no references to it here.

      Reply ↓
  7. DJG, Reality Czar

    I’m throwing the splash of cold water again. From Yves Smith, who, demurely for Yves Smith, has placed this nugget in an endnote: “Readers have been taking umbrage in comments at my contesting their readings of events and documents in an Iran-favoring way, as in letting their sympathy for Iran skew their perspective.”

    Indeed. Observations.
    –We are in a particularly turbulent moment and (likely a cause) a moment of particular moral degradation.
    –I am seeing articles in which the Center for Strategic and International Studies is claiming 1.4 million Russian casualties. Ukraine, miraculously, or bullshittily, has suffered 150,000 fatalities — a number that was considered preposterously low two or so years ago. Chancellor Merz, not to be outdone in the German quest for major defeats, now wants a war with Russia.
    –The MOU may indeed be a Minsk / lying-to-Gorbachov / Nato-expansion moment, this time applied to those darned excitable Shiites. (Recall that someone had to explain to George W just who Shiites are.)
    –The genocide in Gaza, the West Bank, and now Lebanon is a clear indication of what happens to any captive population. After all, the U.S. of A. has the Cherokee and Choctaw Trail of Tears as a “proof of concept,” to use a vulgar term. And slicing up the Russian Federation is a fantasy I’m still seeing in Anglo-American publications, just as we will see new pushes to dismantle Iran.
    –All of these signs point to endless war, or to put it another way, the Global War on Terror, now in year 25, is a pretext to replace governance with endless war. It’s all of a piece: genocide, looting, pillaging, and religious hysteria.
    –Mashhad is a very important city religiously in Iranian culture (even if it is Khamenei’s hometown). Let’s see how the Anglo-Americans screw this up.
    –And, bunky, I gather Usonians are grumpy about the tone of the celebrations for the 250th anniversary of the Declaration of Independence. Maybe someone in Anglo-America could do something to rein in the Anglo-American oppressors? Asking for a friend.

    Reply ↓
    1. tet vet

      How ironic is it that we are celebrating the 250th anniversary while simultaneously formally legislating the loss of our independence by attaching ourselves to another country. Nothing independent about that!

      Reply ↓
    2. .Tom

      DJG, Reality Czar: “All of these signs point to endless war, or to put it another way, the Global War on Terror, now in year 25, is a pretext to replace governance with endless war.”

      John Helmer in a YouTube chinwag last week: “Let let me go back another almost hundred years to von Clausewitz the Prussian who’s most famous for saying ‘war is the continuation or extension of politics by other means.’ I’d like to say that when when one is in an imperial time as we are now Clausewitz has to be reversed. It’s politics. Politics is the extension of war by other means. War is now an end in itself.”

      The MoU, its negotiation, its publication and use as a device of leverage and buying time is all politics. The war against Iran is as old as the Islamic Republic itself and the MoU was never going to stop that war. Such politics serves the ultimate purpose of endless war.

      Reply ↓
    3. Yves Smith Post author

      I laid out a bunch of bread crumbs but did not well articulate what bothered me and led me to see Iran’s position as weakened:

      1. Iran is making clear it does not want a hot war now. It is really not a good look that it has done absolutely nothing to help Hezbollah, after all this blathering about the first paragraph being the most important because Lebanon. A firmer response is overdue.

      2. Vance and US officials seem bizarrely unconcerned about low even if better transits through the Strait of Hormuz. Is the current low level of new loadings (which is what matters if the US is not to go over the oil cliff) actually adequate, at least for US purposes? Or (similarly) is Iran undermining its energy leverage by loading and shipping oil at a frantic pace?

      3. The lack of concern may be stupidity and arrogance (which this Administration has in abundance) but their actions are consistent. They are flagrantly violating the MOU and signaling an expectation that the war will resume soon by moving more forces in. Iran complained to Qatar about it, so this is happening, again contrary to claims of some YouTubers.

      Similarly, with the $6 billion of frozen assets, the US is really really determined to force Iran to buy some American soyabeans with it. Qatar is sticking to the position that at least some needs to be used for humanitarian purposes. Per the post, Iran has been forced to concede that, but the US and Iran are still wrangling over what that means. Note Qatar may be being a stickler, which here favors the US, to punish Iran for bombing the Ras Laffan LNG site.

      And the negotiations over this $6 billion is being used to hold up other frozen asset discussions. Recall that Iran had wanted $24 billion of them up front, which suggests Iran saw those monies as not overly encumbered.

      4. Iran is visibly off its game. Pezeshkian before Doha and now another official afterwards (forgive me for not running down his name but a foreign ministry member) have repeatedly made statements to the press that strongly suggest that Iran has secured the contested $6 billion when it has not. The fabrication mentioned in the post, of trying to depict Iran as still messing with Oman-side transits with an easily debunked tale of Iran running a non-cooperating vessel aground, is desperate.

      And Iran has made screechy, the lady-doth-protest-way-too-much statements after the last two GCC meetings, one with Rubio, the other now of military types with CENTCOM. Again, it comes off as weak, as in when Western officials harrumph that something is unacceptable.

      Re #4, I had also been able to take Iran statements about factual matters as pretty trustworthy. I can no longer do so.

      Reply ↓
      1. lyman alpha blob

        Are we sure that Iran has done nothing to aid Hezbollah? Hezbollah does seem to have some very effective drones that are doing a lot of damage to Israeli occupiers, although that’s hard to verify from just video evidence. They certainly haven’t driven the Israelis out, but they do seem to be landing some blows with a steady supply of weaponry. Can they produce all this themselves?

        This is the thing that has me puzzled – we see again and again even from Western sources that US/Zionist entity missile stocks are running low. If this were true, is it something that these governments would advertise publicly all over the interwebs? But the thing that does make me think there is something to this alleged shortage is the existence of the MoU in the first place. As I mentioned above, Trump agreed to it to hold off an imminent retaliatory Iranian attack against Israel, presumably because they were unable to defend themselves at that moment and the US knew it. There was also a post from an Iranian official I believe, a couple weeks or so ago, saying that Iran now 120% of its pre-war stock of missiles, and this after a US assessment saying they probably had up to 70%.

        I guess we won’t know what is true until the shooting inevitably starts again.

        Reply ↓
        1. JonnyJames

          Laith Marouf claims that Hezbollah is still effectively engaged in guerilla warfare against Israeli occupiers and inflicting casualties. No doubt Iran has assisted Hezbollah and will likely continue to do so. Marouf and others don’t believe Israel can continue to hold south Lebanon and will withdraw as they have done in past invasions.

          Reply ↓
      2. hk

        In a way, this underscores the superiority of the Russian approach. Iran scored a lot of zingers early, both by its aggressive approach as well as excellent PR, but once they caught the car, they are hard pressed to keep up. Once fighting sort of stops, you can’t stay all that aggressive–especially if you already showed your hand by starting negotiations under a nominal ceasefire (unless you are openly willing to punish the other side hard for violations). Clever PR doesn’t actually help you negotiate with the other side, and in fact, may even distract.

        Reply ↓
        1. Polar Socialist

          Russia has the benefit of being way, way more united at the top. Iran has three factions (to simplify things) trying to fill out the vacuum left by the previous strong Supreme Leader. And they also value patience, so they don’t do things in haste.

          In other words, they are simultaneously trying to wear out internally the other two factions, and externally USA, Israel and even the UN. With some added shadow boxing on the future course Iran should take.

          If that comes out to us western observers as somewhat chaotic and even weak approach to MoU, I can’t really blame us. It may even be chaotic and weak, but I assume we don’t know the half of what is going on in the corridors of power in Iran.

          Reply ↓
      3. JonnyJames

        Scott Ritter on Nima yesterday also agrees with you. Iran (and prof, Marandi) have said several times over the past weeks that Iran would retaliate on a large scale if attacked again, and not do “tit for tat”, but they have done just that. Their credibility has suffered because of it. They have the military capability to retaliate on a large scale, but have not pursued their interests effectively. Why not? Have they been duped yet again?

        Iran may be “recharging” its batteries as well during the MoU distraction, but so is the US/Israel. But Ritter (and Macgregor) said that the US has no viable or workable military options. US magazine depth is still low and restarting hot war would deplete it further. Iran should know that and maximize their position, but they are not. This is puzzling

        Michael Hudson said Iran will never see any of its money, so far he is correct.

        Reply ↓
    4. Michael Fiorillo

      1.4 million Russian casualties has got to be up there with Snake Island, the Ghost of Kiev, the Russkies cannibalizing the chips in their washing machines and all the other NATO/US propaganda slop being fed to the masses.

      Reply ↓
    5. Offtrail

      Maybe someone in Anglo-America could do something to rein in the Ango-American oppressors

      This is a deeply, deeply embarrassing question.

      Reply ↓
  8. DJG, Reality Czar

    I don’t care much for misuse of terms like “kabuki” and “leftist,” but I am going to drop in one term that gets thrown around a lot but that seems to be throughly appropriate right now:

    treason

    How is integration of the U.S. military and its contractors, given the current state of endless war, with a country that is a bad actor in its own region and guilty of endless war crimes, not treason?

    And if the standards for treason under the law cannot be met, how is passing this act *not* an impeachable offense? Why not start prosecutions for impeachment?

    https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2026/5/30/us-congress-advances-american-israeli-military-integration-plan

    Or would that mean that *even* Chuck Schumer will have to be impeached?

    Reply ↓
    1. The Rev Kev

      Once the Israelis are integrated, you can be sure that they will influence which officers get to advance in rank so if you are not a Zionist, your career comes to a grinding halt.

      Reply ↓
      1. Es s Ce Tera

        I wonder if the American practice of extraordinary rendition, torture, state terrorism, extrajudicial assassination, killing civilians, piracy, ignoring international law, etc. was due to Israel already being integrated all along.

        Reply ↓
        1. JonnyJames

          We don’t need no stinkin Israel to commit crimes (not to mention the genocide of the indigenous peoples of North America). War crimes are as American as apple pie, but we turn a blind eye. It’s just the Israeli bad apples, merka is always the good guys: the poor, helpless white so-called Christian elites and oligarchs are putting up a huge resistance to Israel and they don’t benefit one bit. (Sorry for the sarcasm)

          Just three events in the past illustrate that the US has had no problems mass murdering civilians, children etc in the past. And these had nothing to do with Israel.

          The US dropped nuclear bombs on civilians in 1945

          The US (with the UK and others) bombed Korea into the “Stone Age”

          Nixon/Kissinger illegally carpet-bombed Laos, Cambodia and Vietnam without even informing Congress.

          Reply ↓
        2. McSnoot

          Alfred McCoy has a great book about the US basically inventing the modern surveillance state along with torture including waterboarding etc. during our occupation of the Philippines.

          Policing America’s Empire: The United States, the Philippines, and the Rise of the Surveillance State

          Reply ↓
    2. KD

      We can only hope that the American Deep State comes to the rescue on this one, as the political class are all bought off. On the other hand, America is like the little old lady and Israel is her rabid chihuahua she insists on letting run around without a leash. He is the most moral little dog in world.

      Reply ↓
      2. vao

        The USA has an agglomeration of sprawling intelligence and spying organizations (16? 17? more?), and the past couple of decades have shown that some of them have practically a free hand at what they do, that secret funds abound, that temporary sub-organizations hidden in the official organigrams are set up for operations that are even more questionable than what the government usually orders.

        Even the (non-intelligence) military repeatedly ignores the orders from the president: attack against Iran (under Bush), evacuation of Afghanistan (under Trump), evacuation of Syria (under Biden).

        I am convinced that once that takeover merging of US intelligence with the Israeli one is formalized, the CIA, DIA, NSA, and whatnot will start setting up unofficial cells, carefully separated from formal communication channels and decision forums, compartmentalized so that American spies and analysts can work on projects they deem essential without having to share any information with the Israelis. I am pretty sure that those cells will systematically exclude Jews as a matter of fact.

        Of course, at some point these manoeuvres will become apparent: “scandals” will break out because the USA did not share some crucial information about the shenanigans of some terrorists / Near Eastern power with the Israelis (possibly with dire consequences when an attack against Israelis fails to be foiled).

        Or the Israelis will be surprised to bump onto an unknown CIA unit carrying out an uncoordinated operation on the same target (possibly with dire consequences when Mossad and CIA operatives start shooting at each other).

        Or the USA will carry out an operation on some highly secret foreign installation with very specific tactics and armaments, demonstrating the possession of detailed intelligence about it — and the Israelis will be pissed off because they did not get that information.

        Fun games.

        Reply ↓
        1. Travis Bickle

          For at least 20 years, when I read into this stuff heavily in grad school, Israel has worked hard at getting into CIA politically and overtly, as you see now with the military, versus the backdoor route with traditional spying and covert ops of one flavor or the other. At that point in the past CIA had already set up dedicated cells for Israeli concerns as you describe, a practice then under focused attack by American-Israeli congresspeople on the various intel committees, Jane Harman comes to mind.

          I would speculate that at this point their problem has been resolved.

          The thing to internalize here is the relentlessness of these people. And of course the existential pressure they are under to stay so focused, given the fundamental lack of legitimacy enjoyed by the State of Israel. Facing them you have individuals worried about careers and mortgages.

          Drawing back to consider the larger question now discussed, Israeli needs and priorities are ultimately what will drive US decisions here. Ives is right, that Iranian escalation is overdue, if they are to make one.

          Reply ↓
          1. JonnyJames

            One huge underlying problem is that Israel policy, and US foreign policy in general, benefits the US oligarchy. BigOil, BigTech, the MICIMATT (MIC), BigFinance etc. are all doing quite well and receiving tens of billions in gov contracts with notoriously fat margins.

            Notice that there is little if any resistance in high places to US policy? And it aint just the Jewish/Zionist oligarchs. Plenty of non-Jews in high places fully support this. Don’t take it personal, this is “strictly business”

            It aint just AIPAC who bribes Congress and US politicians, other powerful lobbies are present as well and they have CONVERGING INTERESTS. The fancy word is “epistemic communities”

            Political bribery is now LEGAL, formalized and institutionalized,. so what do we expect? The rule of law is crumbling, constitution ignored, etc. This is much worse than many realize.

            Reply ↓
            1. Redolent

              you implied it…..Converging Interests
              allow me to add ‘controlling’…..as in….controlling convergent interests
              It’s bantered about frequently in capitalist spin

              Reply ↓
          2. Mikel

            The movie names are fun aren’t they? “Travis Bickle”

            I still get a chuckle out of “Not Sure”.

            Reply ↓
      3. Acacia

        Where’s Freewheelin’ Franklin when you need him to drop kick the rabid chihuahua into the middle of next week?

        Reply ↓
    3. hk

      The trouble is that Congress does the impeaching and it’s already full of traitors worse than Benedict Arnold.

      Reply ↓
    4. Oregon Lawhobbit

      How is integration of the U.S. military and its contractors, given the current state of endless war, with a country that is a bad actor in its own region and guilty of endless war crimes, not treason?

      Because, as the saying goes, “…if it prospers…”* There will be much prosperity floating around for all the involved parties after the integration, therefore it’s not treason.

      Now in a nation of laws that still adhered to Jefferson’s “entangling alliances” admonishment or Adams’ “not going forth in search of monsters to slay,” there’d be 24/7 gallows running for weeks in DC. But that train left the station when the US made the switch from republic to empire quite a long time ago, so….

      *”Treason doth never prosper, what’s the reason? For if it prosper, none dare call it treason.”— Sir John Harington, Epigrams (1618)

      Reply ↓
    5. John Wright

      Israeli spy Jonathan Pollard might be now suggesting he was just ahead of the time when he spied for Israel in 1984-1985 timeframe..

      Here’s a link to the damage assessment.

      https://nsarchive2.gwu.edu/NSAEBB/NSAEBB407/docs/Pollard%20damage%20assess%20CIA.pdf

      Pollard is planning a political career in Israel now.

      After the military merger, one could suggest there will be no future damage assessments of the sharing of intelligence with Israel.

      As far as prosecutions for treason after the midterms, I like to quote an old radio ad for a local bailbondsman.

      “Friends don’t let friends do time”.

      Reply ↓
      1. hk

        Pollard is not an “Israeli spy.” He’s an American traitor. If he was really an Israeli, one could almost respect that. An American traitor deserves no sympathy.

        Reply ↓
        2. Travis Bickle

          There was a response to this sort of indictment, then and now, used both to try to get Pollard a pardon back in the nineties and in pursuit of Israel interests more generally today, that Israeli and US interests are one and the same.

          Therefore, any conflict between us is impossible. Pollard was working for the best interests of both countries and deserved a metal if anything.

          This is not meant to inflame, but to point out the fundamental logic being deployed, which allows for a great deal of flexibility and even disagreement between the two countries about means. (This all boils down to a us v. them [the rest of the world mentality]),

          To disagree somewhat with grapeape, who posts below, the ultimate arbiter of what is going to happen will not be the US, but rather those whose interests are more genuinely existential.

          Reply ↓
    6. David in Friday Harbor

      The fascist/Kahanist government of the settler-apartheid entity is certainly the “enemy” of humanity but is not the “enemy” of the “United States.” The settler-apartheid entity is rather the de facto 51st state.

      Under the U.S. Constitution “treason” is defined as making war against the United States, adhering to its enemies, or providing them with aid and comfort. Subverting the U.S. military to the settler-apartheid entity is certainly both corrupt and immoral in terms of the majority of historical ethical traditions (but far from all), but it does not meet the legal definition of “treason” under American law. The destruction of Iranian/Persian civilization is the stated war goal of the fascist/Kahanist cabal and their stooges in Washington. They have decided that cheap grace and phony tribalism have exempted them from the Commandments.

      As the world’s human infestation approaches an unprecedented 8.5 billion lives in simultaneous being we will inevitably see many more such justifications on offer for genocides and ethnic cleansings. This U.S.-Iran MOU is simply a “Minsk moment” for the various players to re-align themselves before the tactical nukes start flying. Does anyone think for a moment that the arrival of Pakistani troops in the KSA is anything other than a nuclear parasol pitched over the House of Bone Saws?

      Who’s kidding whom? Perhaps this is simply rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic; burning Iran to the ground can only accelerate the planetary inferno overwhelming our petro-civilization. Good luck with the extinction thing.

      Reply ↓
      1. jsn

        “ Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.”

        The framers did us on favors with that one.

        Reply ↓
  9. PVDSteve

    The only way a renewed bombing campaign makes sense is if it involves the use of nuclear weapons. The US can reload it’s magazines in the region in this period, but as has been reported consistently for months, the most crucial standoff and interceptor weapons have been depleted to levels that would mean a new round of full on war would use up the remaining stockpile. It was already assessed that it will take years, not months, to refill the weapons used in the last round. Asking Ford and GM to retool to help missile inventories is a PR move not one we are seeing reflecting in actual industrial capacity.

    Since there has been no movement of the hundreds of thousands of troops needed for a full scale ground operation, the only option for one would be the previously discussed attempt to use special operators to seize the coastline of the Strait. Attempting such an operation would be a disaster. A couple thousand Marines trying to hold dozens of miles of coastline would be under constant bombardment from attack drones and would take mass casualties until being forced to withdraw.

    Another round of bombing runs and assassinations will do little but deplete US stocks while signing the end of the world economy. An attempt to militarily seize the Strait would do the same. So the only military option that would seem to have any even small possibility of actually defeating Iran would be the use of nuclear weapons, but even that is no sure thing.

    While the Empire has clearly been devious with the MOU in ways Iran is struggling to deal with, I don’t think a new round of escalation actually offers them anything beyond the libidinal urge to dominate. A modification of the current Minsk 3.0 frozen conflict where kinetic action is kept at a minimum while sanctions remain in place would seem like a better option for advancng their imperialist goals.

    Reply ↓
    1. XXYY

      I have been thinking the same thing. We have been there and done that regarding a hot war with iran.

      Iran is arguably in better shape since the start of the last hot war, with its military becoming more seasoned, it’s missile manufacturing fully online, and with extensive experience with the tactics and technology of the US under its belt.

      Meanwhile the US is in dramatically worse shape since then, with most of its infrastructure in the Gulf wiped out (including military bases and radar installations) and it’s defensive capabilities used up with no hope of replenishment. There is a looming shortage of both diesel and jet fuel, which is what military machines run on. The US military has also suffered a lot of reputational damage since the start of the last hot war, which, while not decisive of anything, makes a difference. And of course, US forces are at the end of a logistics chain stretching halfway around the Earth, while the Iranian forces are fighting in and for their homeland.

      It’s also summer in the Middle East now, so foreign soldiers are going to have an extremely tough time even going outside, let alone fighting some kind of determined military action.

      Hard to see any US hot war not being an utter disaster this time.

      Reply ↓
    2. ISL

      What if the US thought it had found a chink in the Iranian AAD systems and could crash them again with a cyber attack, allowing dumb bombs to be dropped on Iran? And what if this chink was “found” by Israel, which really just wants the US to continue its war? And what if it wasn’t real – would the current leadership make the correct decision?

      If I were Iran, I would leave a few fake holes in the security system that are actually isolated from affecting backup systems. Russia seems to have figured out how to protect itself from US cyberattacks, and helped Iran get on its feet last time in just 12 hours. I am sure they have set traps.

      Reply ↓
    3. Travis Bickle

      I’d be more prepared for something creative, and perhaps half clever from the military.

      The retired technical analysts we hear from have often been out of the game for decades, and the objections I hear are often based on dated assumptions. Fact is there are a lot of smart guys in the military who may come up with something arguable or even plausible. And if someone is as anxious to buy and as un-selfaware as Trump is about their gullibility, look out (as has been shown).

      A couple other IMHO observations:

      Nukes get a bad rap. In some genuinely creative and empowered plan they may well have a role with a sufficiently objective Commander. Radiation can be minimized and localized, and is manageable, and ultimately these things are just Big Bombs. They might be used to take out mountain passes Iran would need to reach Marines on a shoreline. Or just the Shock and Awe of an airburst, to excite Major Hegseth, not that that’d be Terrorism or anything.

      The wider context to consider here has got to be the midterms. Trump really does care about them, and if he cannot bend the rules to retain control of house and senate, what are the odds he’ll choose to break them in the key races necessary? How might that eventuality play into the need for a National Emergency.

      Reply ↓
  10. Socal Rhino

    Re Vance comments:

    Maybe they signal a Minsk-like sinister plan to delay conflict while war preparations regain steam. If they are taken at face value. On the other hand, this could be about domestic politics and damage control.

    The administration faces criticism for being weak and letting the MOU take effect with the Iranian military intact, with the strait not back to normal, and with no deal on nuclear enrichment in hand. Mid-term polling is not looking good. Speaker Johnson is having real difficulty controlling his slim majority in Congress. Rubio, a hawk’s hawk much favored by Israeli oligarchs, wants to be the next president and the 2028 campaign will become the focus after November.

    It’s all good folks, we know what we’re doing, says the VP.

    I don’t doubt hostilities will resume. It’s the only tool in the toolbox. They don’t know what else to do.

    Reply ↓
  11. Janeway

    Giving Israel total control over the US military is genius. I really mean it!

    After the total integration of Israel over the USA, the world will be firmly in Zionist control forever.

    As time goes by, Russia & China will also soon fall under Israel control and then world peace since the Zionists will control everything forevermore.
    /s

    Reply ↓
  12. DD GE

    Re: Crude getting out of the Gulf

    The 2nd half of this Stack post is about the oil transits :
    https://nickwade.substack.com/p/better-flows-were-clearing-a-backlog
    It reckons that empty tankers going in aren’t numerous enough yet to blunt the shock.
    It also has this nugget : Iranian crude is meanwhile building up in floating storage off Singapore and speculates that looks less like a bet on higher prices and more like preparation for the strait’s next closure.

    Reply ↓
    2. ISL

      A month ago, I was on a port tour of Long Beach, and there were many tankers offshore. The port manager said they just idle their for months and months and then when the price hits a (only known to them) set point, they head in to unload. Floating storage indeed.

      Reply ↓
  13. voislav

    This was always going to be a dangerous phase for Iran, translating military victory into peacetime gains. I don’t think that US is planning another military campaign, I imagine that, from the US/Israeli perspective, status quo is preferred.

    Military action is in the low-intensity mode that doesn’t strain US ammunition supply. Iran is still under sanctions, albeit with a short-term relief that will be revoked in the near future. Israel is continuing to operate in Lebanon without restrictions. Iran’s economy took heavy damage in the bombing and that will put increased strain on the population and leadership the longer this situation persists.

    My sense is that the time is working against Iran now, the balance of power is tilting away from them. US is using salami tactics to slowly chip away at the MOU without triggering a full scale war. The longer this goes on, the harder it will be for Iran to restart the war and reestablish deterrence.

    The best course of action for them would be to restart the war soon, heavily mine the Straits (especially the Omani side) so that the only way through is on the Iranian side and reset the table that way. This would reestablish their control of the Straits and tilt the balance back in their favour.

    Reply ↓
  14. XXYY

    – Iran will spend part of the initial $6 billion on goods needed by Iran, purchased according to Iran’s announced needs and made available to Iran.

    Unless there is some other subtext to this, I don’t see this sentence as any kind of “blinking” by Iran on how it’s frozen funds are spent when released.

    As I read this sentence, Iran could buy antibiotics or nuclear bombs and be in accordance with it. “Made available to Iran” is a strange formulation, but of course technically something has to be made available to you in order for you to buy it.

    Are they saying the things they buy have to be “made available” by some external sanctions committee?

    Reply ↓
    1. Yves Smith Post author

      That statement is an Iran fudge, and they have been doing a lot of that of late, which is proof of weakness.

      Iran most assuredly cannot buy nuclear bombs with it. Which creates an interesting problem, since money is normally fungible.

      The 2023 Biden deal which included the release of the $6 billion was that it was being released for humanitarian purposes. That means Iran cannot spend it freely. It cannot use it for military purposes or even to pay salaries of government employees.

      Qatar which holds the purse-strings, supports the idea that that restriction still holds.

      Iran which heretofore had insisted very loudly (when Trump brought up the idea of the funds going for purchases from US farmers) that it was their money, no strings (at least one official said that).

      However at the time, and I neglected to document it in a post, Professor Marandi in a weird comment on IIRC Nima, said that Iran had given Qatar a shopping list and prices!!!

      Reply ↓
      1. ACA

        I heard that interview and took that to mean Iran had made a list of desired goods and also the cost on the market for those goods. If the US had better prices, the US may get the contract.

        Reply ↓
      1. Acacia

        Iran is currently in a period of 40-day mourning. I wonder if that accounts for the quiet right now.

        Reply ↓
  16. XXYY

    Re. Footnote 5:

    The Wall Street Journal reported a crisis in US-Saudi Arabian relations. Trump threatened to withhold missile interceptors from Saudi Arabia during the war. Here is what happened and why it matters.

    1) In early May, Trump announced Project Freedom on social media without…

    — Shaiel Ben-Ephraim (@academic_la) July 1, 2026

    This is a take that should have gotten a lot more play than it did.  It looks like Saudi Arabia has concluded that it’s relationship with the US is not doing it any good. In particular, the promise of US defense of the Kingdom has turned out to be empty.

    In fact, having a relationship with the US and basing US forces in your country looks like an actively bad idea at this point. It paints a target on your back for US opponents, and it drastically narrows your political maneuverability since it’s hard to please the US and anyone else at the same time.

    This is a life or death issue for Saudi Arabia since the country depends on very vulnerable infrastructure (a small number of energy and desalinization plants) to remain capable of supporting modern human civilization and the current level of population. They remain one missile attack from having to evacuate the country, at least during the summer months.  (Ukraine comes to mind, although they at least have the water problem under control somewhat.  I think about half the population has emigrated from Ukraine since the war started.)

    Saudi Arabia also remains wide open to any kind of military attack.  The country is completely flat, and almost all their physical labor is done by immigrants, not good if you are trying to raise a military force.

    Reply ↓
    1. amfortas

      yeah. this is the sort of thing ive been watching for.
      when the other Gulf States…and the wider Arab World in general…finally figures out that being buddies with USA just aint worth it, and is more likely to be harmful.
      ive mentioned all the random rumors and flight trackers floating around that indicate that talks among the wider arab world might be happening under the table.
      my intuition is all i have to add to these rumors,lol.
      (i admit that i want this to happen, too…ive been against my country being an empire since i figured out that it actually was….the end of that was never gonna be easy.)
      but bad behavior eventually carries consequences.
      i’ll keep watching that space.
      and the usa essentially abandoning its so called “allies” during such an event must have been a wake-up call.
      i also consider that these gulf states are all oppressive dictatorial monarchies, with large numbers of foreign workers, and also large numbers of Shia.
      iran bombing them because they support the usa and israel(!) surely doesnt contribute to a peaceful and happy underclass,lol.
      wouldnt surprise me in the least if all of them are looking for an out/alternative arrangement.

      Reply ↓
      1. amfortas

        and heres richard wolf with a slightly different version of the same idea: gamechange:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hC5K-UWh9uw

        Trita Parsi pretty much word for word what i said on breaking points, today,lol…all “alluding” because they all aint talkin about it.
        i allege that theres a new security and otherwise architecture emerging in the “Middle East”.
        and the usa aint gonna be a party to it.
        i welcome the end of amurkin empire…as i said, i thought it was stupid and harmful when it first dawned on me that we actually were an empire.
        the problem is the inertia of ideology within the ruling class…that Aurelian so aptly dissects.
        those peoples’ ricebowls are at stake, here,lol.
        they dont wanna let the empire go.
        and in spite of the legitimacy crises in the West(sic), they will go to the wall to “stand athwart history, yelling “STOP!””

        Reply ↓
  18. grapeape

    Yves, respectfully

    Moreover, it would seem unwise to act before Israel had cemented its control over US military and intel:

    I think this is a misreading of the effect of the law. Israel will continue to be the tail that is wagged, but this will allow the executive to do an end run around the courts and elements of the civil service that resist the will of the executive.

    It will also allow US oligarchs to have direct input into military affairs at the seams between the two militaries, above and beyond what they can currently do today.

    Look at the history of the five eyes or NATO, where the legal seams allow each state to step around their own legal and democratic limits by shifting their extra-legal or democratically illegitimate acts across national boundaries.

    You spy on my people for me and I’ll spy on yours. You start a war for me that your people don’t support and I’ll do it for you.

    And the big dogs are the big winners, while their tails get a cut – and it’s not the fleas on the tail or even the dog that get the cut.

    Or to be explicit, Israel will run the us military but the president and his cronies will run Israel. And no one below oligarch level will have any input.

    Reply ↓
  19. Ann

    0948 PDT

    White House gives ‘green light’ for permanent US troop presence in Poland, aide says

    https://www.polskieradio.pl/395/7784/Artykul/3704291,white-house-gives-green-light-for-permanent-us-troop-presence-in-poland-aide-says

    Lithuanian leaders back removing constitutional ban on nuclear weapons, president says

    https://www.lrt.lt/en/news-in-english/19/2978183/lithuanian-leaders-back-removing-constitutional-ban-on-nuclear-weapons-president-says

    Iran rejects Macron’s plan to clear Strait of Hormuz

    https://www.politico.eu/article/iran-rejects-emmanuel-macrons-plan-clear-strait-hormuz/

    State TV Cuts Mic on Iran’s Chief Negotiator Mid-Interview Over New US MOU

    https://irannewswire.org/iran-us-memorandum-state-tv-censorship-chief-negotiator-split/

    Reply ↓
    1. Safety First

      The Lithuania-nukes story is actually pretty important. Basically, the three Baltic states have, for the past 35 years, largely been exceedingly loyal US proxies. Majority-owned US subsidiaries, if you will, with minority stakes from Swedish, Danish and German banks and business interests.

      When the Soviet Union went away in 1991, a major US concern was controlling the nuclear weapons stockpile. The decision was made that it was better for one of the newly created nations to control it all, and then for the US to control it – Russia under the Yeltsin government. The plan worked like a charm. But that’s also why Ukraine signed the NPT and the Budapest Memorandum, Lithuania had the constitutional ban, and so on. This was the architecture that Washington preferred at the time.

      Now, clearly, the Baltics are being set up as the next proxies to be thrown into the fire. “Drones-for-Ukraine” factories being built, including a new one announced today or yesterday; pretty much openly allowing “Ukrainian” drone transits, especially per the recent statement of Estonia’s foreign minister; all but beggin the US to station some nukes on their soil, which is where Lithuania’s constitution comes in. Finland, by the way, is rushing to catch up to the same boat, it just hadn’t had a 35-year head start…

      From Washington’s perspective, it all makes perfect sense – either the Baltic Tigers will continue to escalate (maybe trying to seize a ship or two in the Baltic next), or Russia will eventually snap and then we’ll have our sacrificial victims of unmitigated and unprovoked Russian aggression the rest of the Europeans can be mobilized to fight for. Of course, the problem is the other European proxies are not quite yet ready for a full-on military confrontation…but we have time. Every month the Ukraine hangs on buys the US more time.

      Reply ↓
      1. urdsama

        “Every month the Ukraine hangs on buys the US more time.”

        How? The US military is not in great shape, and the munitions are even worse. These are not issues which will be solved in a few short months. Most estimates are years. And in any case, what good would that do? We have already seen that the US is way behind the curve by favoring few, massive weapons as opposed to many, smaller weapons. And that is just the tip of the iceberg.

        So I guess in the strictest sense it buys time, but it is time that does no good.

        Reply ↓
  20. Ann

    0955 PDT

    Afghanistan launches airstrikes on ISIS bases in Pakistan, Taliban claims

    https://www.indiatoday.in/world/story/afghanistan-launches-airstrikes-on-isis-bases-in-pakistan-claims-taliban-2937935-2026-07-01

    Russia Signals Ukraine May Have Used Its First Ballistic Missile

    https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2026-07-02/russia-signals-ukraine-may-have-used-its-first-ballistic-missile

    Russia suspends rail border crossings with Finland, Estonia and Latvia

    https://www.lrt.lt/en/news-in-english/19/2977288/russia-suspends-rail-border-crossings-with-finland-estonia-and-latvia

    Araghchi threatens to ‘school’ Israel if US unsuccessful in ‘muzzling its pets in Tel Aviv’

    https://www.jpost.com/middle-east/iran-news/article-901161

    US reportedly mulls pulling troops from Saudi Arabia as ties sour over Iran war

    https://www.timesofisrael.com/us-reportedly-mulls-pulling-troops-from-saudi-arabia-as-ties-sour-over-iran-war/

    Israel, US sign agreement for permanent Jerusalem embassy compound

    https://www.i24news.tv/en/news/international/americas/artc-israel-us-sign-agreement-for-permanent-jerusalem-embassy-compound

    Reply ↓
  21. Keith Newman

    From Yves’ post there is a “recap from Arya Yadeghaar on Twitter” of the long list of violations of the MOU by the US.
    It certainly seems Iran has been Minsked, openly, obviously, and with Iran’s full collaboration. I suppose something may occur soon and it’ll turn out it was a ruse by Iran but it certainly doesn’t seem so now.
    People regularly point out that the US is not agreement capable because its word is meaningless – a promise made today is broken tomorrow.
    But how different is Iran under the MOU? It signed on assuming a list of conditions would be met. Almost none of them have been. Yet Iran has barely responded. That’s not the way agreements should work.
    I have never been involved in negotiating international agreements but I have been involved in labour negotiations involving hundreds of millions of dollars. If one side deliberately violates any significant part of an understanding the whole thing is off and labour action or lockout by management resumes. How can it be otherwise? A threat not carried out means that party’s word is worthless.
    Professor Marandi has often stated that the Iranian people and its leadership are steadfast and principled and fully understand the double dealing of the US. I am beginning to wonder if that is true of the leadership.

    Reply ↓
    1. friar john

      The answer is because the anti-imperialists saw Iran fighting back and thought they cared to change the status quo.

      They do not. China does not. Nobody cares.

      It’s capitalism until extinction. It’s all about grabbing as much as you can before it ends.

      Enjoy the ride!

      Reply ↓
    2. John k

      The only thing I can think of is waiting for the funeral etc to be over, I guess a very big deal over there and must have been in the works since he died. The security issues must be massive.

      Reply ↓
    3. Travis Bickle

      Right.

      So unless Iran puts its foot down and keeps it there until the US behaves, it will be slowly strangled.

      This presumes they will not somehow be able to recover to a better tactical or strategic position than the US in the immediate future. Seems to me that their leverage stands only to weaken, but that’s just me.

      If they must necessarily take the world economy over the oil cliff, they will want to have the PR on their side, but ultimately even that doesn’t matter. Because unless they prevail they stand to take a beating whenever in their future they presume to get off their knees. They will cease to be able to pretend to being sovereign.

      OTOH….the US must put them in their place, else they stand as an example to every other punk country. North Korea is bad enough, but leaving Iran in effective control of the World Economy???? From the US perspective the whole MOU business had to be BS from the word Go.

      As implied yesterday (and today) something must be afoot by the US/Israel. Iran, to prevail, needs to do what it takes to shut down the gulf, but US/Israel must do what it takes to emasculate Iran.

      How does this all unfold? The military will be asked for options, which they will deliver, even when the price-tag in terms of body-bags and PR is high. Judging from Trump’s past good (sic) judgement can infered with some reliability, which should tell you something.

      Reply ↓
      1. True Disbeliever

        @Travis Bickle,

        Thanks for your contributions here.

        If they must necessarily take the world economy over the oil cliff, they will want to have the PR on their side

        How do you perceive Chinese influence on Iran?

        Reply ↓
        1. Travis Bickle

          Iran has a tough, existential decision facing it. Earlier they could *hope* to finesse things, but that hope was never anything more. Yet they had to do their best, whether or not they get any credit for it.

          Maybe China will want to step in and with some magic, diplomatic stroke make everything copasetic?

          But as for reality. Iran needs to make a decision whether or not to go over that cliff: like Butch Cassidy [considers posting YouTube segment]. It seems clear the US/Israel has made its own decision. Maybe Iran figures they need to shoot first, maybe they have a counterpunch wired in; Maybe they’re clueless; maybe the leadership is in disarray; maybe they’ve tacitly agreed to submit. Pick your odds.

          But this thing cannot continue. Whoever draws first is interesting but not as critical as what happens then.

          On my second cocktail riff, one final Deep Thought:

          We seem to be in the realm where the most probable outcome/event is itself highly improbable (< 50%). Nobody friggin knows. And when whatever reality happens, the tree of probabilities is bound to reveal hitherto unacknowledged and unanticipated dangers and events from the POV of Israel and Iran, the two parties with real power to impact events here, even as they stand to spin out of control.

          Sleep Tight

          Reply ↓
    4. Henry Moon Pie

      Have you ever been involved in negotiations where one side had nukes and was crazy/ruthless enough to use them?

      Reply ↓
      1. lyman alpha blob

        Indeed. A possible next step for Iran would be to disable a US warship, possibly taking prisoners. Whether that results in Iran ultimately having control of the strait or not, it is highly likely to result in a lot of dead Iranian civilians, given past actions from the US and Zionist entity.

        I suspect that might be what is giving Iran pause in the face of multiple breaches of the MoU.

        Reply ↓
    1. lampoon

      Yes, an interesting conversation, in which Pilkington claims that manipulation of the derivatives market in oil has become much more effective because hedge funds, who dominate the trading, all use AI, and it can be fooled. He mentions two methods. First, AI reacts to headlines. Second, AI reacts to the short interest at the beginning of the trading week. Pilkington said this is a recent phenomenon, because the dominant use of AI trading is less than 2 years old. He points out that Secretary Bessent is an experienced hedge trader (via Soros) and is intimately familiar with their AI strategies and how to manipulate them. The oil futures market is basically broken as a future price discovery tool.

      Reply ↓
  23. Socal Rhino

    My view:

    If Iran were being “Minsked” we’d be having this discussion in 10 years, not now. Everything isn’t Donbass 2014 just like everything isn’t Germany 1939.

    Clearer I think to say that the US is probably being dishonest in its dealings with Iran (highly probable) and maybe Iran is being too trusting (non-zero, maybe not probable but they have history). Is that the best explanation for current behavior? What are alternative explanations and is the evidence stronger or weaker? What are the risks with current tactics and are better options available? etc.

    Reply ↓
    1. Safety First

      There seems to be definitional confusion.

      A “Minsk” agreement – in today’s realities – means a ceasefire agreement where one side clearly does not intend to follow through upon the agreed terms, but instead is using the agreement for an operational pause to rearm/rebuild before the inevitable next round of the conflict. This is exactly what is happening with the “Islamabad MoU”, and this is exactly what had happened with the two original Minsk agreements. [And Merkel personally confirmed this.]

      The fact that Russia chose not to force the issue militarily until 7 years later – and, in fact, if Biden’s merry band of idiots hadn’t taken over the White House in 2021, might even conceivably have waited 4 years more – is a completely separate concept. You are “Minsked” first, and then you decide what to do about it, if anything.

      To be sure, I doubt that Iran has 7 or 11 years to wait, unlike Russia. Or even 7 to 11 months. And by the way, I’ve already pointed out yesterday that in my view, Russia, by waiting for so long once Minsk 2.0 happened, made ripping the Band-aid off in 2022 that much worse for itself. But on the other hand, from 2014-2015 onwards there were voices in Russian media saying this very thing – that the agreement was a sham, that Ukraine was rearming, that “we’re delaying the inevitable”, but the government chose to stick to its course (of waiting). Again, that’s an argument over the response, not the initial action.

      Separately. The Washington establishment has a habit of running the same plays out of the same playbook for decades, irrespective of how successful they might be in a particular situation. I suspect this is why Khamenei II was skeptical of the MoU to begin with, and had said so in print. They just hadn’t been forced into a ceasefire (by proxy) prior to 2014, at least not for a long, long time, so now that particular play is “getting Minsked”.

      As for the point whether Iran was too “trusting” – trust had nothing to do with it, I don’t think. Iran is not a monolithic colossus policy-wise, neither is China, nor Russia, nor even the US. It has factions and tribes and competing interests. Clearly there was a faction that wanted to go the MoU route – whether to limit the costs of the war, or to assuage the Chinese, or to please their political constituency. The selling point was – articulated in print by the Iranians themselves – at best we get a deal, at worst we get some goodies before the next go-around. Others in Teheran acquiesced to this, probably because they needed an operational pause anyway.

      Again, the big question is – what do they do now, and when. If you were writing a computer script, there are at least 5-6 theoretically possible paths, some of them costlier to Iran than others. And from there, we can only guess which path they’ll choose, though prior performance (always a determinant of future results!) suggests Teheran will run out the string for a while longer, at least to hit the stated MoU deadlines before claiming a breach.

      Reply ↓
  25. The Joker

    Don’t forget that the Iranian football team would be in a very bad place if the US took real umbrage at something Iran did. They are effectively hostages right now. And even in Mexico or Canada, where they must overnight, they are not safe from US malice.

    When they are back on Iranian soil things might be very different.

    Reply ↓
    1. The Rev Kev

      They are back home and received a hero’s reception-

      ‘Team Melli finished third in Group G after it drew 2-2 with New Zealand in its opening match, followed by a goalless draw against Belgium and a 1-1 draw with Egypt in its final group game.

      Iran came close to reaching the knockout stage for the first time, but a late goal against Egypt was ruled out for offside. The team’s hopes then ended when Austria scored a stoppage-time equalizer against Algeria in Group J.’

      https://www.rt.com/news/642482-iran-world-cup-return/

      And then this jerk had to have his say. US Homeland Security Secretary Markwayne Mullin said ‘I was so happy when we were able to pull their visas and said they could leave US soil, and I might have sung a song or two, or maybe danced a happy dance’

      Reply ↓
  26. Ann

    1455 PDT

    White House weighs ‘250 pardons for 250 years’ in new wave of clemency to mark America’s birthday: report. The president has already drawn scrutiny for his acts of clemency – including nearly 1,600 Jan 6 defendants

    https://www.the-independent.com/news/world americas/us-politics/250-pardons-white-house-trump-b3006083.html

    Everyone Is Celebrating Falling Oil Prices — One Analyst Warns They’re Actually the First Sign of Something Much Worse

    https://nationalsecurityjournal.org/everyone-is-celebrating-falling-oil-prices-one-analyst-warns-theyre-actually-the-first-sign-of-something-much-worse/

    Reply ↓
  29. NotThePilot

    I actually have a lot to add, but life’s too busy right now. I will say, Yves, you have my respect for wading through all the news (and noise… newoise?) to understand this war.

    I will also say though, I still see people making a lot of assumptions about what the Iranians are doing, why, and their capabilities (not just military). At the risk of coming across as a “plan truster”, my gut says that while everyone has their eyes on Hormuz, other wheels are in motion. And if we’re lucky, this war just might wrap up relatively soon, and Iran won’t be the only beneficiary.

    Sorry for the vague posting, but for any other Americans here, enjoy Independence Day. It’s been a weird, wacky, and sometimes f***ed up 250 years, but we can still appreciate the good times.

    Reply ↓

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *