Not compliance from Iran, whose long-term trustworthiness remains to be seen.
But compliance from the U.S.’ most trusted Middle East ally: Israel.
Some observers say that Israel, which isn’t mentioned by name in the MOU, isn’t bound by its mandates.
“Israel was not part of the MOU, not part of the agreement. So how could Israel be required to comply with it when it involves apparently Hezbollah's ability to continue to launch missiles and to attack Israel and to commit terrorism against Israel still funded by Iran?” Bob Good, a former U.S. House member from Virginia, asked on American Family Radio Monday.
The MOU, in its 14 points, mentions neither Israel nor Hezbollah specifically but does mention the “allies” of both the U.S. and Iran in the first sentence.
It was signed electronically last Wednesday by President Donald Trumpa and Vice President JD Vance along with Iran’s Parliamentary Speaker Mohammad Bagher Qalbaf and Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi.
Hezbollah, it appears, did not immediately get the MOU memo.
There was an immediate uptick in fighting between Iran’s terror proxy and Israel that looked to possibly derail Switzerland peace talks before a Israel and Hezbollah agreed to a ceasefire on Friday.
Israel is not an MOU signatory, and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has stated his nation isn’t bound to its provisions, particularly those requiring a withdrawal from southern Lebanon — Hezbollah’s host nation — and an end to military operations against Hezbollah.
Israel maintains it retains the right to act independently to protect its security.
Good told show host Jenna Ellis Iran’s last-minute guiding hand is evident in Hezbollah’s early actions after the MOU.
“It seems as if they've got Hezbollah provoking Israel, attacking Israel, and then to use that as leverage to close the Strait (of Hormuz) again or to not abide by the deal or to perhaps try to bind Israel's hands and allow them to be victimized by their enemy, Hezbollah,” he said.
Netanyahu hasn’t publicly criticized the deal.
Good praised Netanyahu as a leader but notes the shared values of the U.S. and Israel — such as democratic government — mean he leads by the will of the people.
“He could be removed from power. He may be removed from power. He's certainly not a dictator or a supreme leader like we find other places around the Middle East and so forth. So, if we want Israel to abide by (the MOU), comply with it willingly, then it would seem that it might make some sense to involve them in the negotiations,” Good said.
Such contact between the U.S. and Israel hasn’t been made public, but there’s no way to know what conversation has been like behind the scenes.
Trump has not explicitly encouraged Israel to defend itself against Hezbollah strikes — action that risks escalation and eventual upheaval of the peace talks — but has instead urged both sides to keep the fragile peace alive.
Sunday, he called on Iran to reel in Hezbollah.
“Iran must immediately stop their highly paid PROXIES in Lebanon from causing trouble. If they don’t, we’ll hit Iran very hard again, just like we did last week, only harder!!!” he wrote on Truth Social.
If in fact Israel was excluded from writing the terms of the MOU, it’s presumptuous for the U.S. to demand compliance, Good said.
“It seems to be in Iran's interest and its demand, at least an understanding perhaps, that Israel can't respond. That's part of the agreement. Hezbollah can attack Israel, but Israel cannot respond to those attacks. That’s obviously problematic for Israel.”
More Hormuz trouble ahead?
A Christian political scientist has some real concerns about the MOU, saying Iran will use it to buy time until the midterms.
"The Iranians are many things, but they're not dumb. And they know that a memorandum of understanding, an MOU, will buy them some time. They will probably find a way to reclose the Strait of Hormuz, to cause other issues that will keep gas prices inflated. I think the Iranians are playing this to some degree, and they know the midterm elections are coming, and they know there'll be relief if Democrats end up winning one or both chambers of Congress," Dr. Glen Duerr of Cedarville University told AFN.
Duerr sees the MOU as one-sided in favor of Iran.
"It does nothing for regime change, and it requires some faith in terms of nuclear weaponry, which is all very, very problematic," he said.
Another academic, A.J. Nolte, associate professor of politics at Regent University, addressed concerns about the MOU last week.
