Just hours after the United States and Iran signed the so-called Islamabad Memorandum of Understanding aimed at ending months of conflict, senior Iranian figures and state-linked media outlets are already outlining a far more expansive interpretation of the agreement — one that ties its implementation to developments in Lebanon, the future of Jerusalem, and continued pressure on Israel.

Speaking on Iranian state television after the agreement was reached, Iranian Parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, whom President Donald Trump insisted was a “rational” figure during negotiations, declared victory.

“Everything we sought to achieve through military action was secured several times over at the negotiating table, in a way that cannot even be compared,” Ghalibaf said.

“If we truly seek justice [for Khamenei], then that justice will be achieved through the liberation of Jerusalem,” he added. “We must uphold that honor, remain committed to that vision, and carry out that mission.”

Meanwhile, Iran’s state-linked media apparatus has begun pressing for a strict reading of the agreement that could complicate efforts to move forward with negotiations.

In an editorial published by the political desk of Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps-affiliated Tasnim News Agency, the outlet argued that the Strait of Hormuz should remain closed as long as Israel continues military operations in Lebanon.

Tasnim contended that Article 1 of the memorandum requires an end to military operations “on all fronts, including Lebanon,” and guarantees Lebanon’s sovereignty and territorial integrity. According to the outlet, those conditions have not yet been met because Israeli military actions in Lebanon continue.

The editorial further pointed to Article 13 of the agreement, which states that negotiations on a final deal can begin only after implementation of several key provisions has commenced, including Article 1. Tasnim argued that beginning final-status talks before the Lebanon-related provisions are fulfilled would itself violate the memorandum.

“Strategic and political logic dictates that the Strait of Hormuz should not be reopened to ease pressure on the United States while Israel’s attacks and violations of Lebanon’s territorial integrity continue,” the editorial stated.

That position appears to conflict with one of the agreement’s most significant objectives: restoring commercial traffic through the Strait of Hormuz, a critical global energy chokepoint that Iran had effectively shut during the conflict. U.S. officials have said reopening the waterway is a central component of the memorandum and expected shipping traffic to begin increasing immediately after implementation.

Tasnim also characterized the memorandum as “the official declaration and manifesto of the United States’ and Israel’s defeat” in the war that began on February 28, while warning Iranian negotiators against what it described as potential American efforts to manipulate the agreement’s implementation timeline.

(YWN World Headquarters – NYC)