Analyst: Trump has very little chance of striking Iran nuclear deal within 60 days

Donald Trump signed a US-Iran memorandum of understanding two days ahead of schedule, making sweeping concessions to Tehran. Igor Gretsky, a researcher at the International Centre for Defence Studies, argues the move reflects a political dead end for Trump ahead of midterm elections. He warns the deal is unlikely to hold, and that Moscow is watching closely, drawing its own lessons.

US President Donald Trump signed a memorandum of understanding between Washington and Tehran two days earlier than expected this week, dramatically softening his rhetoric on Iran's ballistic missile programme and nuclear demands, and, according to analysts, handing Tehran nearly everything it had sought.

Igor Gretsky, a research fellow at the International Centre for Defence Studies in Tallinn, says the rush to sign reflects a political trap Trump has walked into, not a diplomatic triumph.

A Deal Born of Desperation

«This is the consequence of the dead end Trump finds himself in,» Gretsky said. «On one hand, he and the Republican Party face midterm elections, and voters are angry about high fuel prices at the pump. On the other hand, there is no political space to continue military operations, because that would keep petrol prices high, and Congress is sceptical about additional Pentagon funding for continued strikes.»

In Gretsky's assessment, Iran's strategy of political attrition has paid off. Tehran calculated that if it simply endured long enough, domestic pressures would force Washington to blink. After roughly 3.5 months of active hostilities, that calculation proved correct.

Notably, the memorandum is framed as an agreement involving the United States, Iran, and Israel. Yet Gretsky argues that Israeli interests are effectively absent from its substance, raising the possibility that Trump sidelined a key ally to secure a deal quickly.

Israel Will Wait, Not Sabotage

Despite being sidelined, Israel is unlikely to actively torpedo the agreement, Gretsky believes. Instead, Jerusalem will wait for the moment when Washington and Tel Aviv begin blaming each other for non-compliance, which will organically reopen the political window for military action.

«Iran is an existential threat to Israel, there is no doubt about that,» he said. «But for now, Israel will simply wait for the deal to reach the point where both sides start accusing each other of violations.»

Former US Ambassador to the UN Nikki Haley has already publicly called the deal «a fantastic mistake», questioning the logic of funding the reconstruction of a strategic adversary whose resources had just been targeted by US strikes.

The Kremlin's Lesson

Gretsky is particularly concerned about what Russia is taking away from the Iran episode. The Kremlin, he argues, will read the outcome as validation of the political exhaustion strategy, the idea that authoritarian states can outlast democracies by simply absorbing punishment while waiting for electoral cycles to erode political will.

«Putin is counting on the fact that elections in key countries supporting Ukraine may produce changes that weaken that support,» Gretsky said. «I think he places particularly strong hopes on Germany, where right-wing populists have grown significantly stronger.»

Can the Deal Survive 60 Days?

The memorandum gives the two sides 60 days to agree on a full nuclear deal. Gretsky is deeply sceptical. By the time that deadline arrives, Trump will be even closer to the midterms, making it politically even harder to resume strikes if talks collapse.

The Institute for the Study of War has already warned that the economic benefits Iran gains from reopening the Strait of Hormuz and resuming oil sales will help Tehran rearm and refinance its network of proxy forces. Whether Iran emerges from the conflict strategically stronger remains debated, but Gretsky believes it will at minimum feel emboldened: having withstood one of the world's most powerful militaries for months, Iran is likely to continue its destabilising activities against Israel, confident that American decision-making will always be constrained by the ballot box.