by Jasim Al-Azzawi

Middle East Monitor 

In late June, US and Israeli forces declared a halt in their operations against Iran’s nuclear infrastructure. But among seasoned observers, this pause is seen less as a peace effort and more as a tactical breather. Experts have dubbed it a phantom ceasefire—a moment of calm before renewed chaos. “This is a phantom ceasefire, not a real de-escalation,” said Daniel Shapiro, former US Ambassador to Israel. “Iran still has the knowledge, still has the uranium, and likely still has undisclosed facilities.”

No alarm rang louder than the one in Vienna. In June, IAEA Director-General Rafael Grossi confirmed that Iran failed to declare nuclear material and activities at three covert sites, Lavisan-Shian, Turquzabad, and Varamin.”Iran did not declare material and activities at three undeclared locations, and the agency is not in a position to determine whether the related nuclear material is still outside of safeguards.” Grossi added that Iran’s lack of cooperation “impeded verification” and that IAEA inspectors were concerned about attempts to sanitize the sites. Meanwhile, Iran’s uranium stockpile had reached over 400 kg enriched to 60 per cent, alarmingly close to weapons-grade.

Analysts from the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) and the Brookings Institution agree that the first wave of US-Israel strikes, though impactful, did not thoroughly neutralise Iran’s program. Key infrastructure—especially in deep underground sites like Fordow—survived. “The key question is, was there any highly enriched uranium stored elsewhere… and are there centrifuges elsewhere as well,?” asked retired Gen. Wesley Clark. Tehran retains the technical know-how to rebuild, and the longer the delay, the stronger its capacity to resume enrichment.

The IAEA’s open wounds

Grossi’s assessment revealed both Iran’s historical plan to evade thorough inspection and current opacity. Without full IAEA access, trust has eroded. For hawks in Tel Aviv and Washington, this lack of transparency is more than a red flag—it’s a green light for further military action. “We cannot undo knowledge,” Grossi warned. “The danger remains. The clock is ticking.”

Netanyahu’s unfinished business

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu faces domestic turmoil and mounting pressure from the right. He has repeatedly vowed never to let Iran reach the nuclear threshold. The first strike bought time, but not closure. As regional analysts at the Atlantic Council noted, “Israel may seek new strikes to decisively eliminate the Iranian nuclear threat—especially if diplomacy fails.”

Trump, Epstein, and the politics of distraction

Adding a combustible element is the potential fallout from the upcoming Epstein files, which reportedly include high-profile American names, among them Donald Trump. Though there is no conclusive evidence linking Trump to criminal behavior, the political damage could be immense if he is implicated. US history shows how often foreign policy becomes a tool of domestic diversion. From Clinton’s strikes during the Lewinsky scandal to Bush’s Iraq war pivot after 9/11, presidents under pressure have turned to conflict as a rallying cry. “If that file breaks and Trump feels cornered,” said one Democratic strategist, “expect fireworks—foreign ones.” If Trump sees his legal troubles eclipsing his political future, initiating or backing a military crisis might serve as a calculated distraction. The rhetoric of “stopping Iran” could rally his base and drown out courtroom drama.

Diplomacy on life support

From a military standpoint, Iran remains vulnerable but not incapacitated. The Brookings Institution noted that many in Washington believe that “unless Iran grants full access to its sites, a second strike is not only possible—it is the default.” Meanwhile, Iran’s refusal to provide full access has given the appearance of bad faith, especially considering Grossi’s report. From Israel’s vantage point, the current lull allows Tehran to regroup. That alone may compel a second strike—sooner rather than later.

Although both sides claim to prefer a diplomatic resolution, few believe serious talks will resume under current conditions. The IAEA revelations, combined with political gamesmanship and battlefield scars, have left little room for compromise. As one Chatham House analyst put it: “We’re watching the negotiation window close in real time. The first strike may have ended diplomacy, not restarted it.”

Conclusion: The illusion of calm

The world may speak of ceasefires, but the foundations of war remain firmly in place. Iran’s nuclear ambitions are neither forgotten nor forgivable to its adversaries. The US and Israel feel the job isn’t done. Iran shows no signs of full cooperation. And Trump may soon need a distraction. The fantasy of peace is comforting—but dangerously misleading. This isn’t peace. It’s intermission.