Skip to main content

Iran plays by Trump’s rules to deepen his war dilemma

(CNN) — Iran seems to be playing Donald Trump at his own game.

The president complained Monday that the Islamic Republic can’t be trusted to honor an agreement, rebuking its rulers for one of his own signature moves.

“It was a done deal, and then they broke it. They always break it,” he told Fox News of the memorandum of understanding that briefly paused the war. Trump did not seem to appreciate the irony of his critique, given his habit of walking out on multiple international agreements, including the Paris Climate Accord (twice). Some critics would trace America’s current predicament to Trump’s first-term decision to scrap the Obama-era deal capping Iran’s nuclear program.

Later in the day, a frustrated Trump vowed to impose his own toll on ships transiting the Strait of Hormuz. Iran — in an offer laced with sarcasm — jumped in with a better price than the author of “Art of the Deal.”

“POTUS is absolutely right,” Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi wrote on X, arguing that Trump had legitimized Tehran’s position on charging for passage through the vital waterway. Araghchi added archly: “20% is of course too much. We will be fair.”

Trump is finding out that Iran drives a hard bargain and has its own interpretation of what was in the memo. And he’s yet to clearly explain to Americans why he reignited a war that he repeatedly said he’d already won.

Weeks after declaring that an MOU he signed with a flourish meant he’d forever ended Iran’s nuclear program and brought peace to the Middle East for the first time in 3,000 years, he’s changed his tune. Trump said on Hugh Hewitt’s radio show Monday the deal was a “test” Iran had failed and “didn’t mean much.”

Once, admirers might have argued Trump’s sharp contradictions are evidence he’s playing four-dimensional diplomatic chess. Now he’s at best locked in a stalemate.

Trump can’t change the reality of the war

The MOU crumbled because Iran acted to defend its top victory in the war — effective control over the strait. This reinforced a harsh reality for the US: For all Trump’s threats and military power, Tehran is still dictating the dynamics of the showdown. And the equation that defined the war remains unchanged: The Islamic Republic is using geography and a shrewd understanding of its own limited power to outmaneuver a superpower adversary.

The new test of wills sprang partly from the administration’s rush to negotiate an MOU that contained imprecise language. Trump’s team of real estate negotiators under the leadership of Vice President JD Vance appeared to miss what critics more steeped in history and diplomacy immediately realized: that Iran would use it to grab new leverage.

For example, the agreement called on Tehran to “make arrangements” for the free and safe passage of commercial vessels through the strait for 60 days and required it to work with Oman to “define the future administration and maritime services” in the strait. Superficially, this gives the US what it wants — the normal operation of the strait. But Iran seems to view it as confirmation it will control the waterway after a permanent agreement. It’s hardly surprising, therefore, it’s fighting to shape the new status quo.

The misstep compounded an earlier mistake — the failure to understand that Iran would close the strait in the first place. That this is still an issue a month after the MOU was agreed upon suggests its 60-day timeline for a full deal, including on Iran’s nuclear program, was absurdly unrealistic.

The administration’s struggles to compel Iranian behavior raise the bar for questions about Trump’s return to war.

Is there, for instance, reason to believe that attacks on Iranian targets and Trump’s restoration of a naval blockade will be any more successful in changing the calculations of the new Iranian leaders than they were before? After all, Iran needed only a few missiles and drones to close down the strait again.

And will swiftly mounting economic costs — oil and diesel futures shot up on Monday — again convince the president to blink to avoid the political and economic price that he candidly said last month he wasn’t willing to pay?

Why all-out war could still be averted

One reason for hope is that the renewed clashes could imply the US and Iran are seeking to cement their own interpretation of the MOU to set the table for future diplomacy.

Trump, for example, has shown no sign that he’s willing to pay a possibly heavy price in US casualties from invading the Iranian oil-producing hub at Kharg Island — one possible way to impose American superiority. Some other modern presidents, including Lyndon Johnson and George W. Bush, by contrast, intensified wars that already seemed inconclusive.

And unlike his friend Russian President Vladimir Putin, the US president hasn’t responded to his strategic humiliation in a war that underestimated an opponent by launching all-out war on civilians. Tragedy did strike early in the war when an errant US attack struck an Iranian school, killing 168 children and 14 teachers, according to Iranian officials. And the full civilian toll of attacks is unknown.

But Trump has not followed through on earlier threats to target infrastructure like bridges and power plants, which would severely impact civilian life. And Iran has maintained its own ceiling on escalation with its reprisals against US regional bases or its Gulf neighbors.

The battlefield choreography, meanwhile, currently reflects a conflict that is simmering rather than raging out of control.

“There is room for diplomacy, I think, despite the expanded attacks of the US against Iran (and) Iranian retaliation,” Danny Citrinowicz, senior researcher in the Iran and the Shiite Axis Program at Israel’s Institute for National Security Studies, told CNN’s Becky Anderson on “Connect the World.” But, he, added: “Things can get out of control and escalate because when you have back-and-forth attacks every day, every night, definitely it’s hard to preserve the rule of the game.”

And even if the fresh conflagration stays just below the boil, Trump must still answer a question with which he’s been unsuccessfully wrestling for nearly five months.

How does he get out of the war?

The-CNN-Wire
™ & © 2026 Cable News Network, Inc., a Warner Bros. Discovery Company. All rights reserved.

Republican senators release Fauci’s text messages discussing safety of Covid vaccine and pregnancy

(CNN) — Two Republican senators have released the first batch of text messages retrieved from Dr. Anthony Fauci’s former government phone as part of an investigation into his leadership and actions during the Covid-19 pandemic – including messages in which he discusses the possible risks and safety of the vaccine during pregnancy.Sens. Ron Johnson of Wisconsin and Rand Paul of Kentucky released the texts publicly online Monday, after the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) provided Fauci’s iPhone to a Senate subcommittee investigating him.The phone contained more than 34,000 messages and 522 voicemails, said the senators in a news release. They published screenshots showing a fraction of these – 11 texts sent during Fauci’s tenure as director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID).In one exchange on January 25, 2021, Vivek Murthy, then a member of President Joe Biden’s Covid advisory board, asked about any potential risk to those who are pregnant, or whether Fauci knew of any “data or theoretical reason why vaccinating early vs late in pregnancy would be preferred.”Fauci responded that there was “no data or theoretical reason to believe that vaccinating early versus later in pregnancy would be preferred.”Then he added: “Since many people have significant cytokines storm and fever after the 2nd dose, this theoretically could be associated with miscarriage in the 1st trimester.”Dr. Rochelle Walensky, then-director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), replied, “Definitely a good point, esp after dose two.”In another exchange a day later, according to the screenshots released, Fauci said that any vaccine with limited data on pregnancy should be carefully considered. “One must weigh the potential risks against the benefits,” he wrote, pointing out that a Covid infection could be “especially” serious in pregnancy.Though pregnant individuals were not included in vaccine trials, more than 10,000 had been vaccinated since the government issued an Emergency Use Authorization for the vaccine – and “no issues have arisen,” he wrote in a text.CNN has reached out to Fauci, Murthy and Walensky for comment.The CDC formally recommended on August 11, 2021, that pregnant people receive the vaccine after analyzing data and finding no increased risks of miscarriage or other safety concerns related to the shot.The CDC also warned during the pandemic that pregnant people were more likely to get severely ill compared to those who were not pregnant, according to an archived page from the agency’s website.Studies have since shown that the vaccines were safe during pregnancy, and that serious adverse reactions are rare. The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists still recommends, as of this spring, that individuals who are pregnant or will be pregnant during the fall or winter should receive annual Covid-19 vaccines.In a news release, Johnson and Paul said their staff were reviewing the rest of the information on Fauci’s phone, and would publicly release them “as soon as possible.” The texts released on Monday “could have an immediate impact of public health and the principle of informed consent,” they said.The news release also listed several further public statements made by Fauci and other health officials in the months following the text exchange, recommending pregnant people receive Covid-19 vaccines.Battles on the HillPaul, who chairs the full Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, has long clashed with Fauci, who he subpoenaed in June to appear before Congress.He and other prominent Republicans accuse Fauci of covering up the origins of the pandemic, and of lying and misrepresenting data during the Covid-19 response – though they’ve yet to present clear evidence of such an alleged cover-up.Republican members of the Senate subcommittee voted last week to hold Fauci in contempt of Congress after he invoked the Fifth Amendment more than 100 times in a hearing, refusing to answer questions over concerns his responses would be used in an attempt to bring charges against him.Ahead of that hearing, the committee also released more than 1,100 pages of Fauci’s personal diary from 2019 to 2022.Neither HHS nor Paul’s committee alerted Fauci ahead of time that they had obtained his diary and that they planned to publish it in full, according to a person familiar with the matter.The diary entries narrated Fauci’s growing concerns about Covid-19, frustrations with the government response and conflicting relationships with both Trump and Biden administration officials.The-CNN-Wire™ & © 2026 Cable News Network, Inc., a Warner Bros. Discovery Company. All rights reserved.
Read Next Story