Critics Portray Trump’s Hormuz Deal as Strategic Retreat by Washington

Despite President Donald Trump’s attempt to present a deal with Tehran as a victory, Iranian officials and media insist that their control over the Strait of Hormuz will continue and the United States will free part of their frozen assets at the first stage of implementing the agreement. Washington had emphasized consistently that freeing frozen assets could only be part of a nuclear deal, which is now shelved for future talks.

“Iran has stressed that there will be no agreement unless a specific portion of Iran’s frozen assets is released in the very first step and a clear mechanism is established to guarantee the continued release of all blocked funds,” the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps-affiliated outlet Tasnim quoted an unnamed source as saying on May 24, 2026. Meanwhile, Trump, skipping his son’s wedding, hunkered down in the White House to work on finalizing the deal, which appears to be aimed at opening the Strait of Hormuz, at least temporarily.

According to Tasnim, the finalization of the deal depends on this demand. Tasnim’s source said, “Based on its experience with repeated American breaches of commitments and obstruction, Iran will not allow the issue of releasing its assets to be left to vague or purely paper-based promises.”

It appears that once the United States agreed to negotiate, while Tehran was still able to use the Strait as a bargaining chip, it entered the labyrinth of haggling with the Iranians, who have always been successful at turning their weak position into a winning hand against successive U.S. administrations.

Major General Ali Abdollahi, commander of Revolutionary Guard’s Khatam al-Anbiya Central Headquarters, issued a statement on May 24, portraying the recent conflict as a historic victory that would help shape a “new global power structure centered on Islamic Iran.” Abdollahi praised Iran’s “resistance and steadfastness” against the “American-Zionist imposed war” and argued that the conflict demonstrated how faith and indigenous military capabilities can overcome superior weaponry.

The statement also contained direct threats toward the United States and its allies in the Persian Gulf. Abdollahi declared that Iran would “secure the Persian Gulf” and eliminate what he described as enemy exploitation of the strategic waterway. He warned that the supreme leader’s plans for the “management of the Persian Gulf and Strait of Hormuz” would define a future regional order “in which foreigners have no place.” He further warned that Iran’s armed forces are prepared to deliver a “harsh and hellish response to any aggression.”

The spokesman for Khatam al-Anbiya Central Headquarters shared an artificial intelligence-generated image on May 23 depicting Trump submitting to Iran’s new supreme leader, Mojtaba Khamenei, captioned “The End.”

Both Iranian and non-Iranian critics flooded social media with harsh criticism of Trump as details of the possible deal began to leak out. One commentator posted on X, “If this deal is signed, Epic Fury becomes Epic Failure. It’s as simple as that.”

An Iranian activist, among many others, warned Trump against pursuing negotiations with the Islamic Republic, invoking what he described as past American “betrayals” under Presidents Jimmy Carter in 1979 and Barack Obama during the 2009 protests in Iran. In a strongly worded social media post, the activist argued that if Trump chooses to “shake hands” with the Iranian leadership despite the regime’s crackdown on dissent, many Iranians will remember him alongside previous U.S. presidents accused of abandoning the Iranian people.

Whether the agreement reopens the Strait of Hormuz or postpones another confrontation, Tehran already appears determined to frame the outcome as a victory over Washington. After months of threats, military escalation, and repeated warnings that Iran would never negotiate under pressure, the Islamic Republic now presents the reported release of frozen assets and direct talks with the United States as proof that its strategy of escalation and maritime coercion forced Washington to retreat.

For critics of the deal — both inside Iran and in the United States — the concern is not simply the nuclear issue, or even the temporary reopening of the Strait, but the perception that once again, an American administration entered negotiations from a position of urgency while Tehran successfully transformed military pressure and regional instability into political and financial leverage.