Trump–Iran Deal Eases Hormuz Blockade but Exposes New US, Israel Rifts
Washington and Tehran are moving into a second phase of talks as the US starts lifting naval restrictions and Europe hails a deal meant to end Iran’s nuclear program — even as senior US officials question Tehran’s intentions and Israel bristles. Energy flows, regional deterrence and the futures of key American national security chiefs are all suddenly in play.
Energy markets, regional militaries and US allies are all adjusting to a rapid pivot in Washington’s Iran policy, as the United States begins easing its naval blockade, Tehran talks up a second phase of negotiations, and Europe celebrates a deal it says should end Iran’s nuclear ambitions.
Iran’s deputy foreign minister Majid Takht‑Ravanchi said on 16 June that the US has started to lift what he called blockade measures against Iran, confirming that American naval pressure in and around the Strait of Hormuz is being rolled back. Tehran separately stated that its maritime supply route is operating “normally”, with three Iranian oil tankers in the northern Indian Ocean and two cargo ships heading to southern ports, though the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) is still insisting that all vessels transiting Hormuz coordinate with its navy.
Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi told diplomats in Tehran that a new round of negotiations with Washington will open in Switzerland on Friday, marking what he called the second stage of talks. According to his description, the first stage covered the cessation of hostilities, the Strait of Hormuz dispute and the unfreezing of Iranian assets, while the next phase will move deeper into political and security issues. European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen publicly congratulated US President Donald Trump on the agreement, asserting that both sides agreed it should deliver a definitive end to Iran’s nuclear programme and predicting that the Strait will reopen and oil prices will fall.
The diplomacy is already feeding into market expectations. HSBC has reportedly told clients it does not expect oil flows through the Strait of Hormuz to normalize until late summer, even with a partial reopening, and expects throughput to be capped near 60% of usual levels for now. Major Wall Street banks are cutting their oil price forecasts on optimism around a US–Iran deal, betting that a durable political understanding will outweigh the near‑term constraints on physical shipments.
On the water and in nearby ports, the picture is less abstract. Shipowners and crews still face a militarized chokepoint where an Iranian paramilitary force claims coordination rights over all traffic. Insurers must now price not only the risk of direct confrontation but also the legal and financial uncertainty of operating under overlapping US sanctions relief, European political backing and IRGC demands at sea. For Gulf exporters and Asian refiners, every extra week of constrained Hormuz flows means higher shipping costs, tighter margins and more volatile planning for fuel stocks.
Inside Washington, the deal is exposing sharp divides within Trump’s own national security team. CIA Director John Ratcliffe has reportedly warned the president and other officials that US intelligence casts serious doubt on Iran’s readiness to make the nuclear concessions Washington is demanding in any final agreement. Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth have also been described as skeptics of the memorandum of understanding, worried that Tehran is pocketing strategic gains while offering too little in return. Trump is now said to be considering dismissing several senior officials who opposed the agreement, with one senior US official quoted as saying, “The argument has been settled. Those who opposed it may pay a personal price.”
The deal is also straining the already complex US–Israel relationship. Trump has been unusually blunt in public, saying that if Iran acquires a nuclear weapon under the new framework “they get blown up”, contrasting this with his portrayal of the Obama‑era agreement as one that allowed Iran to obtain nuclear arms. He has simultaneously reassured Israelis that “if it weren’t for the United States of America, Israel would not exist right now”, even as he pressures Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu over Israel’s campaign in Lebanon and criticizes the level of civilian harm from Israeli operations.
For Iran’s leadership, the emerging arrangement offers a chance to trade de‑escalation for economic breathing room without conceding defeat. Trump, by contrast, has described Tehran’s current rulers as “strong and smart people” and “very rational”, a rhetorical shift that Iranian officials will likely cite as proof of international recognition even as US intelligence agencies urge caution. In a region where perceptions of resolve matter as much as written clauses, the gap between the president’s tone and his advisers’ warnings is itself a strategic signal.
Hormuz risk does not need a full blockade to matter — it only takes enough uncertainty to make ships, insurers and governments hesitate, and that is exactly the limbo the new deal has created. Over the coming weeks, traders will be watching actual tanker traffic through the Strait against HSBC’s constrained‑flow forecast, while diplomats track whether Araghchi’s second‑stage talks in Switzerland deliver verifiable nuclear steps or stall in another cycle of mutual accusation. Inside Washington, the clearest indicator will be whether Ratcliffe, Hegseth or other skeptics keep their jobs — or whether Trump decides that securing his Iran legacy is worth reshaping his own security team.
Sources
- OSINT