Has the War Ended?!
WANA (Jun 16) – The stated objective of the memorandum of understanding between Iran and the United States is to bring an end to the conflict on all fronts, including Lebanon. Attention is now focused more than anywhere else on Lebanon, where it will become clear whether Israel is prepared to halt military operations.
Developments over the past day following the announcement of the agreement suggest that the fighting in Lebanon has continued and has not yet stopped.
The more fundamental question, however, is whether the war against Iran itself has come to an end. It is difficult to say with certainty that it has, and the possibility of renewed hostilities remains.
The reason for this uncertainty is that, despite the war’s failure to achieve its objectives, a sufficiently strong deterrent balance has not yet emerged to completely rule out a recurrence.
Did Trump Win Or Did His Own War Defeat Him?
WANA (Jun 16) – “Iran must surrender unconditionally.” This was perhaps the most famous statement Donald Trump made during the early months of the war against Iran; a phrase he repeated in speeches, interviews, and media messages, turning it into the central pillar of the White House narrative about the conflict. But now, months […]
The clearest indication of this is Israel’s behavior. Israel continues to support the continuation of the war and opposes any agreement. Had such a deterrent balance been established, Israel would likely have embraced the Iran–U.S. understanding and moved away from its confrontational approach. At the very least, it would have halted military operations in Lebanon to avoid the risk of reigniting a broader conflict.
That said, if a new war were to break out, its nature would likely be different. Given the global consequences of a regionalized conflict and the closure of the Strait of Hormuz, it is possible that the opposing side’s strategy could change.
In order to avoid a repeat of those conditions, the United States may refrain from formally entering another war and instead leave the military confrontation largely in Israel’s hands.
The reality is that, in this conflict, the United States suffered more disruption and pressure than Israel did—both because of the regional escalation, the closure of the Strait of Hormuz, and the sustained attacks on its military bases across the region.
An Iranian woman walks next to an anti-Israeli mural on a street in Tehran, Iran, June 15, 2026. Majid Asgaripour/WANA (West Asia News Agency)
However, if the conflict were to continue directly between Iran and Israel without overt American involvement, Iran’s ability to respond regionally to Israeli attacks would be significantly constrained. Tehran appears aware of this reality and is therefore seeking to use Washington as a channel through which Israel can be restrained.
From this perspective, regardless of whether the current temporary understanding eventually evolves into a final agreement—which, for now, appears unlikely—the memorandum of understanding primarily serves as a “breathing space” for both sides.
Iran, through the release of part of its frozen assets and the easing of economic restrictions, is seeking to prevent a further deterioration of its economic situation over the next two months while taking advantage of the opportunity to increase oil exports and import essential goods.
The United States, meanwhile, is interested in ensuring that the Strait of Hormuz remains open in order to contain the economic and political consequences that its closure could generate domestically.
Khatam al-Anbiya: End Lebanon Operations or Face Consequences
WANA (Jun 16) – Iran’s Khatam al-Anbiya Central Headquarters has issued a warning over Israel’s ongoing military operations in southern Lebanon, stating that the continuation of such actions could trigger a response from the armed forces of the Islamic Republic of Iran. In a statement, the headquarters said that the Israeli military had violated […]
