A diabolical Iran deal reveals the Trump administration's delusions

analysis Trump's limited capacity to sway Israel spells trouble for the Middle East Sat 20 Jun 2026 at 5:00am As more detail has emerged about the "understanding" signed by Iran and the United States this week, the more analysts have been shocked by just how high a strategic and financial price Donald Trump was prepared to pay to get the Strait of Hormuz reopened. That is, just how diabolically bad a "deal" this really is. But what has also been revealed has been the glaring gap between reality and the deluded mindset in the Trump administration that believes it is not only in control of Israel, but the wider world. A naive, foolish and reckless act "The United States of America", point seven of the US-Iran agreement says, "undertakes to terminate all types of sanctions against the Islamic Republic of Iran, including the United Nations Security Council resolutions, International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) Board of Governors resolutions and all unilateral U.S. sanctions, primary and secondary, in an agreed upon schedule." Er, pardon? The US is committing the United Nations to drop its sanctions against Iran? The US didn't run the UN, even in the days when it believed in it. And needless to say there is no suggestion that anyone actually ran this idea past members of the UN. Those UN sanctions commit all member countries to comply with them. The EU confirmed this week that it would not be "automatically" dropping its sanctions. And neither, apparently, will Australia. But the US committing the UN to blindly follow its actions seems a much less naive, foolish and reckless act than committing Israel to do so. Point one of the agreement says: "The Islamic Republic of Iran and the United States of America, and their allies in the current war, by signing this MOU, declare the immediate and permanent termination of military operations on all fronts, including in Lebanon, and undertake from now on not to initiate any war or any military operation against each other, and to refrain from the threat or use of force against each other, and ensuring the territorial integrity and sovereignty of Lebanon. "The final deal will confirm the permanent termination of the war on all fronts, including in Lebanon and other provisions of this paragraph." By Friday, Israel's actions in Lebanon — notably an escalated attack on Thursday night (Australian time) which led to a fierce battle with Hezbollah in which many IDF troops were reportedly killed or injured — caused Pakistani-moderated talks in Switzerland between Iran and a US delegation led by Vice President JD Vance to be suspended. That provokes all new questions about the rest of the deal. But perhaps more importantly it reflects the reality that no amount of yelling or insults by Trump or Vance is likely to change Israel's actions any time soon. There was considerable shock this week about some of the things the president and vice president were saying about Israel, its prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, and his cabinet ministers, let alone about Iran. "You don't have to knock down a building every time somebody walks into it that's from Hezbollah," Trump said this week. Vance told the New York Times that Israel is "a country of nine million people". "You can't just kill your way out of solving every single national security problem that you have." Trump also ventured a new view of the equity of war, saying that "it's a little bit unfair" for Iran not to have ballistic missiles if other countries have them. These comments reflect just how many shifts in the tectonic plates are going on right now. Israel fights on On the US side, it has suddenly got a big interest in stopping Israel's incursions into Lebanon, a position Iran clearly understands and will exploit to get the US to maximise pressure on Israel, just as aggressively as it is doing with its direct control over the Strait of Hormuz. Unfortunately for the US, the world, and the poor Lebanese people being killed and displaced, Israel now has perhaps an even bigger interest in not stopping. The state of play caused by the joint US and Israeli war on Iran has confirmed that the US doesn't want to get involved in a direct war with Iran again. It just wants it to stop — at least enough to get the Strait of Hormuz opened. The highest possible incentive — political self-interest — rests behind this: the US mid-term elections, and the sudden insight of the US president that ongoing war would mean an "economic catastrophe". In strategic terms, Israel's long-term tussle with Iran for dominance of the region is now concentrated in the belt of land on its northern border via Hezbollah — an Iranian proxy which seems likely to be getting a lot more financial and logistical support from its backer as sanctions are lifted. And while domestic politics in the US — as opposed to belatedly comprehended strategic interests — tell even Trump that US interests don't lie in continuing a war with Iran, domestic politics in Israel runs in completely the other direction. The domestic political considerations in Israel are much more complex than simply being a question about the future of Netanyahu. The Israeli PM has this week faced trenchant criticism across the political spectrum in Israel — not just from the far right — for what is seen as the failure of his war strategy. But that doesn't imply, though, that the argument is for stopping its military campaigns. If anything, he is accused of not having gone hard enough in Lebanon, or of being too willing to appease Trump by stopping direct attacks on Iran. Opposition politicians responded to the peace deal by pledging to go even harder. The discussion in Israel about Lebanon is not framed in terms of the fact it has invaded another country, has displaced up to one million people, and is now systematically razing kilometres of villages in the south. It is framed as being purely about protecting northern Israel. It perpetually presents itself as the victim, in language that outsiders can find jarring with the reality they see on their televisions. For example, Israel's ambassador to the United States Yechiel Leiter posted on X on Friday that Israel remains "committed to the ceasefire agreement reached between Israel, Lebanon and the US", a ceasefire which has appeared a questionable concept over the past month. "If Hezbollah does not violate the agreement, it will be kept," he wrote. "Under all circumstances, Israel retains its right to respond to attacks against it and to thwart threats to its territory, citizens and soldiers." The message from Israeli leaders has been clear and consistent from immediately after the US-Iran deal was first announced at the beginning of the week: Israel not only has no intention of stopping the fighting, it also has no intention of respecting Lebanon's borders or withdrawing. Israeli Defence Minister Israel Katz said on Monday: "Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and I are leading a clear policy that states that the IDF will remain in the security zones in Lebanon, Syria and Gaza — indefinitely — in order to protect the border and Israeli communities from there against jihadist elements." Just to put what has been happening in perspective, Al Jazeera reported earlier this week that the "security zones" to protect Israeli communities have expanded by approximately 1,000 square kilometres in Gaza, Southern Lebanon and southern Syria, since October 7, 2023. "This newly controlled territory amounts to roughly five per cent of Israel's total landmass prior to October 2023, which includes the occupied Palestinian territories and the occupied Syrian Golan Heights", Al Jazeera noted. (That is, including land that countries like Australia which now recognise a Palestinian state also do not regard as belonging to Israel.) Loading'Wake up and smell the reality' Vance said on Friday that "Donald J Trump is the only head of state in the entire world who is sympathetic to the nation of Israel at this moment in time". To be frank, he is probably right. In his remarks directed at Israeli ministers, Vance also observed: "Over the last three months, two-thirds of the defensive weapons that have protected your homeland have been built by American hands and paid for by American tax dollars ... anybody in Israel who thinks their biggest problem is the president of the United States needs to wake up and smell the reality." This was seen as a direct threat that the US may do the previously unthinkable and stop providing US weapons to Israel. If things progress as they are, that might well be the case. But a bit like thinking bombing Iran can bring down the regime, there are considerable hazards in thinking such a move would necessarily force Israel to back down. Remember the interview Netanyahu gave a month ago to the American 60 Minutes program in which he boasted that "we're going to change the Middle East"? "I now see the possibility of the expansion and the deepening of the agreements we do have to alliances with Arab states of the kind that we never even dreamed of," he said. It was time Israel "weaned ourselves" off the $US3.8 billion ($4.2 billion) a year of military aid Israel gets from the US. The clear implication was that it would get more funding support from the Gulf states to support its military as US aid wound down. It was only a month ago. It seemed a pretty wild idea then. As the Gulf states have been pragmatically trying to work out how to improve their relationships with Iran since then, it seems a completely fantastical one now. But it is important to understand just how far from the rest of the world's reality Israel's internal discussion now rests. It has been built on the basis of confidence that the US would always support it. The reality that the support can no longer be presumed seems to now just be dawning in Israel. But just as Netanyahu's claims to be able to influence Trump have now become a burden to him, Trump's limited capacity to influence Netanyahu spells just as much trouble for peace in the Middle East. Laura Tingle is the ABC's Global Affairs Editor.