U.S. conduct during the Iran war and its diplomatic aftermath has dented its diplomatic and military credibility with friends and foe alike. President Donald Trump’s signing of the Islamabad Memorandum of Understanding, a surrender to Iran’s radical regime, is the latest Iran-related miscalculation.
The United States’ half-hearted, conditional and transactional approach to critical security issues, soft spot for Pakistan rooted in its Cold-War ties, and sympathies with Islamist elements in South Asia, always dampened bilateral U.S.-Indian ties and remains a stumbling block to a robust partnership between the world’s two largest democracies—an alliance necessary to ensure an effective anti-China front. Indian intelligence leaders warned successive U.S. administrations about Pakistani ties to the Taliban, but U.S. authorities did not dampen their partnership with Pakistan. Not only did Americans suffer in terms of blood and treasure, but Afghans themselves look at the U.S. partnership with Pakistan as part of Washington’s betrayal.
If trust continues to deteriorate, the United States may risk a serious break with its strongest ally in the region.
After the June 2025 four-day India-Pakistan war, Trump felt slighted by India’s refusal to acknowledge his claims that he diffused the crisis and deserved a Nobel Peace Prize, while Pakistan doubled down on sycophancy. Trump’s subsequent statements helped Pakistan outplay India in the information war. Today, with the signing of the Islamabad Memorandum of Understanding, Washington is at risk of betraying Israel with the same actions that led it to lose India.
Israel is not party to the Islamabad Memorandum of Understanding, even though Trump purported to negotiate on Israel’s behalf and commit it to a ceasefire against a designated terror group. The widening rift between Washington and Jerusalem is no longer a secret. If trust continues to deteriorate, the United States may risk a serious break with its strongest ally in the region. As a result of the recent war, the Islamic Republic, with its economy and conventional military shattered and its nuclear program set back by at least a few years, is at its weakest point in history. At this critical juncture, the United States could have stood firm in solidarity with Israel and taken this war to its logical conclusion. However, Washington betrayed Jerusalem by signing the Islamabad Memorandum of Understanding, giving Iran a window to rebuild and project itself as a new pole in the Middle East’s geopolitical landscape.
The United States gets nothing out of the memorandum, except Iran’s repetition of old promises to end its nuclear program, and the demining and opening of the Strait of Hormuz. The deal does not even mention the Iranian missile and drone programs and its proxies, two pillars of its asymmetric capabilities. In return, Iran gets concrete gains, such as the unfreezing of foreign assets worth $24 billion, a promised development and reconstruction fund of $300 billion, sanctions relief even before the negotiations start, termination of the U.S. blockade, withdrawal of U.S. forces from within Iran’s proximity, and permission to sell oil.
In Iran’s Islamic Republic, America is the Great Satan and a U.S. withdrawal from the Middle East remains its core objective.
If U.S. strategic thinkers consider this deal to be far-sighted statesmanship, they are delusional. An act of statesmanship, even if it includes a tactical retreat and strategic moderation, comes from a position of strength with a vision for the future. Trump’s acceptance of this deal appears instead to be a desperate measure, at the cost of national embarrassment. Trump’s action also sends a false message that the United States has nothing to do with the Iranian regime and that it entered the war at the behest of Israel as a favor.
In Iran’s Islamic Republic, America is the Great Satan and a U.S. withdrawal from the Middle East remains its core objective. Trump’s surrender in the war has brought Iran much closer to realizing this objective, at least in the popular perception. No doubt, Iran has been an existential threat to Israel, and the post-Ali Khamenei regime makes that more difficult.
However, Iran’s missile and drone attacks on Gulf Arab allies and the closure of the Strait of Hormuz present a more serious challenge to America’s long-term strategic footprint in the Middle East, its institutional credibility, and military capabilities. If Iran manages to impose a toll on ships after the 60-day discussion period, it will be a blow to the U.S. status as a security provider in the Arab world, disrupting the regional security architecture and compelling the Arab states to explore other alternatives. Trump’s ambivalence makes the region’s security dynamics more complex and challenging.
The U.S. must learn from its India experience: If it does not stand firmly with its democratic allies, it will not only find itself alone, but it also will face a much graver long-term security challenge.
