Iran’s Foreign Ministry spokesperson Esmaeil Baqaei has taken aim at Washington over the Islamabad Memorandum of Understanding. He claims President Trump admitted he “never believed” in the MoU and considered it a waste of time. But in his rush to score a point against the United States, Tehran’s spokesperson has misrepresented both what was said and when things happened. In doing so, he risks discrediting the very diplomacy that pulled Iran back from the brink.
Setting the record straight
First, the remarks Tehran cites do not refer to the Islamabad MoU. Pinning that label on them turns a general comment into an indictment of a specific agreement, and of the mediation behind it.
Second, the sequence matters. The 14-point MoU was signed on 17 June after high-level talks hosted and mediated by Pakistan. Among other things, it provided for an immediate halt to military attacks and the lifting of the US naval blockade. The blockade now strangling Iranian oil exports was reinstated on 14 July, after the MoU, not before it. Blaming the agreement for a measure it had already lifted is not analysis. It is rewriting chronology to discredit diplomacy.
What the MoU actually achieved
Without the Islamabad MoU, Iran could have faced a far graver fate. At the time, the blockade alone was costing Iran an estimated USD 500 million a day, with billions lost in oil revenue within weeks. The memorandum halted the strikes, opened the ports and laid out a path towards sanctions relief and reconstruction. It created space to save lives, ease economic suffering and avert a wider regional crisis.
That opening did not come easily. Pakistan kept both sides at the table through failed rounds, ceasefire extensions and deep mutual mistrust. Even after the deal frayed, Islamabad has continued urging Washington and Tehran to return to its framework. Tehran’s spokesperson should recognise the value of that effort rather than undermine it with claims that distort the sequence of events.
Grievances on their merits
If Tehran has grievances with Washington, it should address them on their merits, not by discrediting a process that offered both sides a path away from confrontation. Iran itself has insisted it acted in good faith under the MoU. That makes it all the more puzzling that its spokesperson would now treat the agreement as collateral in a war of words.
Diplomatic achievements should be built upon, not sacrificed to political rhetoric. The Islamabad MoU remains the clearest proof this year that dialogue can stop a war. It deserves defending, not spin.
SAT Commentaries, a collection of insightful social media threads on current events and social issues, featuring diverse perspectives from various authors.
SAT Commentary
SAT Commentaries, a collection of insightful social media threads on current events and social issues, featuring diverse perspectives from various authors.
Iran’s Foreign Ministry spokesperson Esmaeil Baqaei has taken aim at Washington over the Islamabad Memorandum of Understanding. He claims President Trump admitted he “never believed”
ehran talks: Pakistan and Türkiye choose peace over the war cheerleaders The quadrilateral meeting in Tehran has rattled the warmongers, those who see diplomacy as
China’s Ambassador Fu Cong took the floor twice during the Council’s 27 October session on Iran’s nuclear file. On the agenda Speaking on the procedural
In yet another edict that defies both medicine and mainstream Islamic scholarship, the Taliban regime has ordered surgeons in Afghanistan to stop corneal transplants, the
A private geospatial intelligence firm says it examined 40 missile and drone attacks launched against Saudi Arabia by Iranian-backed Houthi rebels in Yemen and militias
Wrong remarks, wrong order: Iran’s spin on the Islamabad MoU
Iran’s Foreign Ministry spokesperson Esmaeil Baqaei has taken aim at Washington over the Islamabad Memorandum of Understanding. He claims President Trump admitted he “never believed” in the MoU and considered it a waste of time. But in his rush to score a point against the United States, Tehran’s spokesperson has misrepresented both what was said and when things happened. In doing so, he risks discrediting the very diplomacy that pulled Iran back from the brink.
Setting the record straight
First, the remarks Tehran cites do not refer to the Islamabad MoU. Pinning that label on them turns a general comment into an indictment of a specific agreement, and of the mediation behind it.
Second, the sequence matters. The 14-point MoU was signed on 17 June after high-level talks hosted and mediated by Pakistan. Among other things, it provided for an immediate halt to military attacks and the lifting of the US naval blockade. The blockade now strangling Iranian oil exports was reinstated on 14 July, after the MoU, not before it. Blaming the agreement for a measure it had already lifted is not analysis. It is rewriting chronology to discredit diplomacy.
What the MoU actually achieved
Without the Islamabad MoU, Iran could have faced a far graver fate. At the time, the blockade alone was costing Iran an estimated USD 500 million a day, with billions lost in oil revenue within weeks. The memorandum halted the strikes, opened the ports and laid out a path towards sanctions relief and reconstruction. It created space to save lives, ease economic suffering and avert a wider regional crisis.
That opening did not come easily. Pakistan kept both sides at the table through failed rounds, ceasefire extensions and deep mutual mistrust. Even after the deal frayed, Islamabad has continued urging Washington and Tehran to return to its framework. Tehran’s spokesperson should recognise the value of that effort rather than undermine it with claims that distort the sequence of events.
Grievances on their merits
If Tehran has grievances with Washington, it should address them on their merits, not by discrediting a process that offered both sides a path away from confrontation. Iran itself has insisted it acted in good faith under the MoU. That makes it all the more puzzling that its spokesperson would now treat the agreement as collateral in a war of words.
Diplomatic achievements should be built upon, not sacrificed to political rhetoric. The Islamabad MoU remains the clearest proof this year that dialogue can stop a war. It deserves defending, not spin.
SAT Commentary
SAT Commentaries, a collection of insightful social media threads on current events and social issues, featuring diverse perspectives from various authors.
SAT Commentary
Recent
Wrong remarks, wrong order: Iran’s spin on the Islamabad MoU
Iran’s Foreign Ministry spokesperson Esmaeil Baqaei has taken aim at Washington over the Islamabad Memorandum of Understanding. He claims President Trump admitted he “never believed”
Pakistan and Türkiye choose dialogue as warmongers jeer from a safe distance
ehran talks: Pakistan and Türkiye choose peace over the war cheerleaders The quadrilateral meeting in Tehran has rattled the warmongers, those who see diplomacy as
“Root cause is Washington”: China’s line on Iran at the UN
China’s Ambassador Fu Cong took the floor twice during the Council’s 27 October session on Iran’s nuclear file. On the agenda Speaking on the procedural
Taliban Turn Out the Lights: Kabul’s Ban on Corneal Transplants Blinds Afghans in the Name of Islam
In yet another edict that defies both medicine and mainstream Islamic scholarship, the Taliban regime has ordered surgeons in Afghanistan to stop corneal transplants, the
Moscow’s Eyes in Orbit: How Russia Profits From Attacks on Saudi Oil
A private geospatial intelligence firm says it examined 40 missile and drone attacks launched against Saudi Arabia by Iranian-backed Houthi rebels in Yemen and militias