US-Iran Truce Hangs in the Balance: Peace Deal Signed, But Key Risks Remain

The much-anticipated peace agreement between the United States and Iran has been put on hold. The deal, which was supposed to be signed in Switzerland, aimed to end over 100 days of armed conflict that threatened to ignite the Middle East and disrupt global energy markets. While the truce has prevented an immediate war, it leaves major questions unanswered, including Iran's nuclear future, the control of the Strait of Hormuz, and the region's economic stability. The proposed 14-point agreement was built on a simple exchange: security for prosperity. Washington and Tehran agreed on three main pillars: regional stability, limits on Iran's nuclear program, and the economic reintegration of Iran's government into global markets. However, the deal fell apart just before signing, largely due to disagreements over Iran's nuclear ambitions. **Nuclear Uncertainty Remains** The most contentious issue is Iran's nuclear program. The text of the agreement includes a promise from Tehran to give up atomic weapons and freeze its nuclear activities. However, the actual signing was canceled because the US delegation felt this issue was not resolved. The deal leaves the future of Iran's enriched uranium reserves for later negotiations, pending international supervision. **Economic Risks and the "Checkbook Diplomacy"** The economic side of the deal is equally shaky. In exchange for peace, Washington agreed to gradually lift sanctions on Iran, unfreeze its assets, and facilitate its oil exports. A massive $300 billion reconstruction fund was also proposed. This "checkbook diplomacy" has sparked fierce criticism. US Senator Lindsey Graham compared it to a "Marshall Plan for Germany with the Nazis still in power." President Trump quickly denied giving "even 10 cents" to such a plan, while his vice president, JD Vance, cast further doubt. Experts are divided. Ali Vaez from the International Crisis Group believes this financial trust could be a smart long-term strategy, turning loans into guarantees for regional security. However, Brian Katulis from the Middle East Institute warns that the plan lacks the legal security needed to attract serious investment. **Strait of Hormuz: A Slow Return to Normal** The agreement calls for reopening the Strait of Hormuz, a critical waterway for nearly one-fifth of the world's oil. But experts say a return to normal will be slow. Even with the truce, the "geopolitical risk premium" on oil will likely remain for months. Analysts from Rystad Energy estimate the uncertainty could add up to $10 per barrel for a prolonged period. Morgan Stanley predicts a notable supply deficit in the third quarter, keeping prices high. **New Rules for Trade and Logistics** The conflict has permanently changed global trade routes. During the war, companies built new roads, ports, and railways as alternatives to the Strait of Hormuz. Even if the strait reopens, these new routes are likely to stay. Peter Sand from Xeneta says the region's geopolitical fragility is now a permanent factor in global logistics planning. Furthermore, Iran has hinted it may impose tolls on ships passing through the Strait of Hormuz, a move strongly opposed by shipping companies. Over 550 ships, including 200 oil tankers, remain blocked in the Gulf, according to data from the Financial Times and Kpler. **No Winners, No Losers** Michael Froman, president of the Council on Foreign Relations, sums up the situation: "The conflict shows the limits of military power in the 21st century. Destroying an enemy's capabilities is relatively easy, but turning that into lasting political advantage is much harder." The truce, he says, "avoids a defeat for everyone, but prevents any party from claiming a full victory." The game has changed, but the board remains unstable.