The Wall Street Journal editorial board challenged President Trump’s Iran memorandum of understanding, arguing it’s being undermined by Iran’s use of force against commercial shipping, Gulf states, and U.S. bases. In its response to Trump’s remark that Iran’s
The Wall Street Journal editorial board’s latest rebuke landed with unusual bite—aimed at President Trump’s Iran memorandum of understanding, and at the political messaging around it.
The paper’s board described the “best selling point” for the memorandum of understanding with Iran as having been that it “opened the Strait of Hormuz.” That promise. the board argued. is now being put at risk by Iran’s response to the agreement. It wrote that “the regime is trying to nullify those terms by using force against commercial vessels. Gulf states and U.S. bases.” In the board’s view, those actions “violates the deal” and “calls into question why Mr. Trump signed it.”.
The editorial then took Trump’s own language from a fresh confrontation and turned it back on Washington.
After Iranian attacks on Saturday, Trump said it was “very possible” Iran’s leaders “will never learn.” The Journal board answered with a sharp reversal: “Or is it U.S. decision makers who never learn?”
The board also went after Vice President JD Vance for how he has portrayed the leadership inside Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps. The editorial said Vance appeared to portray that leadership as “transformed” and ready to “turn over a new leaf.” In the Journal board’s counterpunch. it rejected the characterization of Iran’s current rulers. calling them “the same terrorist regime. ” and describing the current confrontation as “this is the Battle of Hormuz that Mr. Trump thought he had ducked.”.
Under the board’s framing. the disagreement is not just about rhetoric—it’s about the core claim that the memorandum of understanding changed what would happen in the Gulf. If Iran is now using force against commercial vessels, Gulf states, and U.S. bases, the board argues, then the bargain’s supposed payoff has been eroded.
That sets up the most direct tension in the editorial: Trump’s question of whether Iran will “never learn” lands differently when the board points to U.S. decisions—especially the memorandum itself—as the choice that may have failed to anticipate the very risk now unfolding around the Strait of Hormuz.
United States politics Wall Street Journal Trump Iran memorandum of understanding Strait of Hormuz JD Vance Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps Gulf states U.S. bases
So WSJ is basically saying the Iran deal was a joke? I mean Hormuz is always sketchy.
Wait I’m confused—did Iran violate something or did Trump mess up the messaging again? Like “never learn” could’ve meant both sides tbh.
Never learn lol. But also I saw somewhere that Vance said something about the IRGC being “changed” or whatever, and now they’re saying no it’s the same terrorist regime. It’s like every week they update the script.