But some Iran experts argue the agreement risks delivering significant concessions to Tehran while leaving key disputes unresolved.
David Schenker, former US Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs, told Eye for Iran he was surprised by the scope of benefits Iran could receive under the agreement.
"I don't feel good about it," Schenker said.
The MOU outlines a 60-day negotiation period during which the future of Iran's nuclear program, sanctions relief, frozen Iranian assets, reconstruction funding and the administration of the Strait of Hormuz will be discussed.
According to Schenker, the agreement effectively gives Tehran major economic benefits upfront while postponing the most difficult negotiations.
"In the meanwhile, it's a tremendous win for Iran," he said.
Lebanon's role in the deal
One of the most controversial aspects of the agreement centers on Lebanon.
Earlier this month, Iran launched direct missile attacks on Israel after Israeli strikes targeted Hezbollah positions in Beirut's southern suburbs. The exchange marked a significant shift in Tehran's approach.
For decades, Iran largely relied on proxy groups such as Hezbollah and Hamas to confront Israel. This time, Iranian officials openly linked attacks on Hezbollah to direct Iranian retaliation against Israel. Many Iran experts warned the Trump administration against tying Lebanon to the Iran conflict.
Iranian leaders subsequently insisted that any broader ceasefire arrangement must also address Lebanon.
Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi warned that negotiations could not move forward unless fighting in Lebanon ended, while other Iranian officials described Lebanon as being at the "forefront" of discussions with Washington.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu rejected what he described as Iran's attempt to impose a "new equation" in which attacks on Hezbollah would trigger direct Iranian military action.
Schenker believes elements of that equation may now be reflected in the MOU.
"I think first and foremost it suggests that the administration wanted a deal more than Iran, so it was willing to make concessions," he said.
According to Schenker, the agreement risks strengthening Iran's regional influence despite the military setbacks it suffered during the conflict.
"They're going to point to this and say, 'Look, Iran and Hezbollah protected Lebanon,'" he said.
He argued that such a narrative could undermine Lebanon's elected government while boosting Iran's standing among Hezbollah supporters.
For Schenker, the precedent may prove as significant as any sanctions relief.
"If Iran can insulate not only Hezbollah but also its other regional partners from retaliation, it strengthens this proxy network across the region," he said.
Concerns over sanctions relief
Schenker also questioned provisions that could lead to the lifting of oil sanctions and the release of frozen Iranian assets.
"They're doing the lifting of the oil sanctions upfront," he said, warning that the move could provide billions of dollars in revenue to Tehran.
The former diplomat said several of the original objectives Washington and Israel cited at the outset of the conflict appear absent from the current framework, including limits on Iran's ballistic missile program and support for regional proxy groups.
He also raised concerns over language that could eventually allow Iran to collect fees related to maritime traffic through the Strait of Hormuz.
"It's something out of a mafia movie," Schenker said. "Iran is offering protection and will shake down international shipping."
The Iranian perspective
While much of the debate surrounding the MOU has focused on geopolitics, oil markets and regional security, some opponents of the Islamic Republic are viewing the agreement through a different lens.
For human rights activist Gazelle Sharmahd, whose father Jamshid Sharmahd was abducted and later executed by Iranian authorities, the announcement felt deeply personal.
"Defeat," she said when asked how she reacted to news of the agreement.
"I think a lot of people feel betrayed."
Sharmahd said many Iranians had believed sustained military and economic pressure had brought the Islamic Republic to one of its weakest moments in decades.
"We had the regime on its knees," she said. "How do we go from there to giving this regime the resources, the power, the legitimacy to build up everything that we took away from them?"
She warned that sanctions relief and new funding could strengthen the state's ability to suppress dissent inside Iran.
"The execution wave will not go down," she said. "In history, we see it goes up when we appease this regime."
Message to Trump
Sharmahd reserved some of her strongest comments for Trump himself.
Speaking directly to the US president, she urged him not to abandon pressure on Tehran.
"Capitulation will not save us. It will be our end," she said.
"You have an army of Iranians. You have an army of American patriots. You have an army in the Middle East standing behind you."
She argued that any future agreement should prioritize the aspirations of ordinary Iranians rather than the interests of the government in Tehran.
"Speak to us," she said. "Not to this regime."
As negotiations move forward, the debate over the MOU is likely to intensify.
For supporters, the agreement offers a pathway away from another costly regional war. For critics, it risks rewarding Tehran while leaving unresolved many of the issues that helped trigger the conflict in the first place.
You can watch Eye for Iran on YouTube or Subscribe and listen on any podcast platform
