The United States and Iran are trading military strikes while simultaneously claiming to be engaged in peace negotiations — a contradiction that has become the defining feature of the most fragile ceasefire in the ongoing Middle East conflict. Twelve days after both governments signed a memorandum of understanding at Versailles, Iran has threatened to halt the Switzerland talks entirely, denied that negotiations are proceeding on the terms the US describes, and exchanged fresh military action with American forces over the past 72 hours. The 60-day window to reach a permanent agreement is shrinking faster than diplomats expected.
The State of Play
President Trump accused Iran of violating their framework agreement, and Tehran threatened to halt negotiations with the US entirely. Meanwhile, violence continued between Israel and Hezbollah.
Iran denied US claims of upcoming talks following weekend clashes. Iran’s Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said Iran would not continue negotiations if the US persisted in launching strikes against Iranian military targets.
The sequence of events has been rapid and destabilising. In the nine days between the Versailles signing and Monday morning: Iran struck a Singapore-flagged cargo vessel in the Strait of Hormuz with a drone. The US responded with military strikes on Iranian military infrastructure. Iran then launched coordinated missile and drone attacks against Kuwait and Bahrain. The US retaliated again. And delegations from both countries arrived in Switzerland for talks — only for Iran to publicly dispute what those talks are even about.
How the Weekend Escalated
President Trump accused Iran of breaking the ceasefire deal and warned the US could be “forced to militarily complete the job.” Senator Bill Cassidy is one of a handful of Republicans joining Democrats in demanding that Congress get a bigger say in what happens next: “Congress wants to be read in. And Congress has our rules and procedures that our Founding Fathers set up, and they set it up precisely so that there would not be too powerful of an institution of a presidency.”
The constitutional dimension matters. Since the conflict began on February 28, Congress has not formally authorised the use of force. With fresh strikes being traded and the ceasefire visibly eroding, the question of whether the president can sustain indefinite military operations without congressional approval is beginning to move from a legal abstraction to a live political confrontation.
The Core Dispute: What Does the MoU Actually Say?
The immediate trigger for Iran’s threat to walk away from talks is not merely the exchange of strikes — it is a deeper disagreement about what the June 17 memorandum actually obligates each side to do.
Iran’s position, articulated repeatedly by Foreign Minister Araghchi, is that the MoU grants Iran a formal and exclusive role in managing commercial traffic through the Strait of Hormuz alongside Oman. Under this reading, ships that do not use Iran’s designated routes are in violation of the agreement, and Iran is entitled to enforce compliance.
The United States’ position, pressed by Secretary of State Rubio in Bahrain and by Vice President Vance in Washington, is that international maritime law does not permit any state to impose tolls or routing requirements on the Strait of Hormuz, that the MoU does not grant Iran such authority, and that any attempt to enforce it constitutes a violation of the ceasefire.
Both positions cannot be simultaneously correct. The Switzerland talks were meant to resolve this ambiguity through the establishment of expert-level working groups on nuclear issues, sanctions and maritime governance. But if Iran walks away — or if the US launches further strikes before the working groups can convene — the framework collapses before it produces anything durable.
The Israel-Lebanon Dimension
Israel renewed attacks on southern Lebanon after signing a US-brokered ceasefire deal, adding another layer of instability to an already fragile regional diplomatic environment. Iran has consistently linked the Lebanon file to the US-Iran negotiations, insisting that Israeli military action in Lebanon undermines Iran’s willingness to engage in good faith with the United States.
Secretary of State Rubio has repeatedly tried to separate the Israel-Lebanon ceasefire from the US-Iran talks, arguing that the two tracks are distinct and should be managed independently. Tehran’s continued insistence on linking them means that every Israeli strike in Lebanon — regardless of its scale or legitimacy — creates further pressure on the Iran-US negotiating framework.
Congressional Pressure Builds
Senator Cassidy told reporters that Congress’s constitutional role in war-making had to be respected, and that the executive branch’s unilateral management of military operations against Iran was stretching or exceeding its authority. Democrats have been more emphatic, with several members of the House calling the situation a war prosecuted without constitutional authorisation.
The White House’s position — that the administration is “preventing” a crisis rather than causing one — has become harder to sustain as the daily exchange of strikes, threats and counter-threats makes clear that the conflict is ongoing and active rather than winding down.
What Happens Next
The next 48 to 72 hours will determine whether the Switzerland talks survive at all. If Iran’s delegation remains at Bürgenstock and expert-level working groups convene as scheduled, the ceasefire framework retains at least a formal existence. If Iran withdraws — or if the US launches additional strikes that Tehran treats as a red line — the talks collapse and the conflict reverts to its pre-Versailles state.
The stakes extend well beyond the bilateral relationship. A collapse of the talks would remove the only active diplomatic mechanism for reopening the Strait of Hormuz on terms acceptable to international shipping, would push oil prices sharply higher, and would confront both the US and its Gulf allies with a conflict that has no clear end state and no alternative negotiating forum.
