On June 17, 2026, President Donald Trump and Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian signed a memorandum of understanding at Versailles. Fourteen points. The Strait of Hormuz reopens, toll-free for sixty days. The United States lifts all sanctions. Iran receives $300 billion for reconstruction. Iran's 440 kilograms of 60%-enriched uranium will be "resolved" via a "mechanism" to be "mutually agreed upon" in further talks over the next sixty days. The U.S. naval blockade ends within thirty days. American forces withdraw within thirty days of a final deal.
As our sister analysis noted when the deal was first announced on the President's birthday weekend, the press responded by asking for "details." They have now received details. The details are that Iran keeps its uranium, gets its sanctions lifted, receives $300 billion, and agrees to talk more in sixty days. And I would like to explain why this is the greatest deal in the history of American diplomacy, and why everyone who disagrees is wrong, including the President's own allies, his own party, and his own prior statements.
The President has been clear on this point. When the deal was first reported in May, he posted on Truth Social:
"Our deal is the exact opposite [of Obama's], but nobody has seen it, or knows what it is." — Donald Trump, via Breitbart, May 24, 2026
Let me walk you through why this is correct. Obama's deal, the JCPOA, limited Iran's uranium enrichment to 3.67% and required Iran to reduce its stockpile to 300 kilograms. Trump's deal allows Iran to keep 440 kilograms enriched to 60%, with disposition to be resolved via a future mechanism. Obama's deal maintained sanctions relief conditionally, tied to compliance verified by the IAEA. Trump's deal lifts all sanctions, immediately, with enrichment addressed later. Obama's deal did not include a $300 billion reconstruction package. Trump's deal does.
So the President is correct. This is the exact opposite of Obama's deal. Obama limited enrichment and tied sanctions to compliance. Trump does not limit enrichment and does not tie sanctions to anything. Obama's deal was called "one of the worst deals ever made by our Country" by Trump himself. This one is the exact opposite. The math checks out.
In 2020, the President posted: "Iran never won a war, but never lost a negotiation." This is one of his most incisive observations. And when Fox News correspondent Peter Doocy read this quote back to him at the G7 press conference, asking how Americans should believe this deal was a win, the President explained that this time was different because "here they lost militarily."
And I need you to understand the architecture of this argument, because it is profound. Iran never loses a negotiation. But Iran lost the war. Therefore the negotiation following the war is different from all prior negotiations. The fact that Iran then negotiated a deal in which it keeps its uranium, gets all sanctions lifted, receives $300 billion, and agrees only to further talks, is not evidence that Iran won the negotiation. It is evidence that the negotiation occurred in a post-military context, and in that context, these terms are completely different from the terms they appear to be.
The most dishonest criticism is coming from inside the house. Sen. Bill Cassidy called it "the worst foreign policy blunder in decades." Sen. Ted Cruz said that "giving billions of dollars to theocratic lunatics" is poor strategy. Former Vice President Mike Pence said the deal "smacks of appeasement." Conservative talk host Mark Levin praised the military action but called the MOU itself a capitulation.
These are the President's allies. His own party. His own base. And they are saying, on camera, that the deal is terrible. And I need you to understand that this is proof the deal is good. Because when Obama signed the JCPOA, Republicans were unanimously opposed. When Trump signs a deal that gives Iran even more, Republicans are also opposed. The common thread is that Republicans oppose Iran deals. The variable is who signed it. And the fact that they oppose their own president's deal proves that their opposition is principled and consistent, which means it can be safely ignored in both cases, which means both deals were actually fine, which means the President was right to call Obama's deal terrible and right to sign a worse one. This is what leadership looks like.
When critics emerged in May, the President posted:
"Don't listen to the losers, who are critical about something they know nothing about ... I don't make bad deals!" — Donald Trump, Truth Social, May 24, 2026
And this is the argument in its purest form. He does not make bad deals. Therefore this is not a bad deal. The terms of the deal are irrelevant. The concessions are irrelevant. Iran's enriched uranium is irrelevant. The $300 billion is irrelevant. What matters is the axiom: he does not make bad deals. And if you start from that axiom, which I do, then whatever this deal contains is, by definition, good. It has to be. Because he made it. And he doesn't make bad ones. This is what the losers cannot understand. They keep looking at the terms. The terms don't matter. The man matters. And the man doesn't make bad deals.
I should address the timeline, because the press is trying to create confusion about when and whether previous deals existed. As our Numbers Desk has documented, the President has been making deals continuously since taking office. Some of these deals were announced and then denied. Some were denied and then announced. Some existed in a state of diplomatic superposition in which they were simultaneously real, fake, imminent, and already completed.
This deal is different. This deal was signed at Versailles. There is a document. There are fourteen points. There were cameras. The President told ships to "start your engines," although, as NPR noted, that is not happening yet because the actual mechanism for safe passage is still being worked out. But the intent is clear. The engines should start. They will start. The fact that they have not yet started does not mean the deal is not working. It means the deal is creating the conditions for the engines to start at a future date, which is what diplomacy is.
The doctrine, stated plainly:
The President signed a deal with Iran. His own tweet says Iran never loses a negotiation. His own party says the deal is appeasement. His own prior position was that Obama's deal was terrible for giving Iran too little of what this deal gives Iran too much of. The deal lifts all sanctions, provides $300 billion, and defers the nuclear question to a future mechanism that does not yet exist. Fox News read his own words back to him and he said this time is different. Sen. Cassidy called it the worst blunder in decades. Ted Cruz called it giving billions to theocratic lunatics. Mike Pence called it appeasement. And the President said: "I don't make bad deals." Every one of these facts is real. Every one of these quotes is documented. The man who called Obama's deal "one of the worst deals ever made by our Country" has signed a deal that gives Iran more money, more uranium, and fewer conditions, and he has done it at Versailles, with cameras, and he is calling it the exact opposite, and he is right, because the opposite of a deal where you get something is a deal where you get nothing, and that is what this is, and it is beautiful. Do your own research.