Former US envoy says escalation would have been worse than deal

Former US ambassador to Israel, Dan Shapiro, said the reported agreement between Washington and Tehran was a “weak deal” but argued it was preferable to further military escalation.

In a post on X, Shapiro said the conflict had been poorly conceived and lacked clear strategic objectives that could be achieved at an acceptable cost.

Shapiro said the reported agreement was among the “less terrible” options available to President Donald Trump and welcomed the apparent decision not to intensify the conflict, warning that further escalation could have triggered a deeper global economic crisis.

He argued that the United States had failed to achieve objectives related to Iran’s ballistic missile programme and regional allies, calling the reported outcome “a bleak day” for US interests.

With all due caveats about a deal that has not been announced yet, some thoughts:

The US-Iran deal being described in the news is a weak deal, and the net result of this war is significant damage to US strategic interests. That said, since the war was a mistake from the…

— Dan Shapiro (@DanielBShapiro) May 24, 2026