Can We Trust This US-Iran "Peace Deal"? | Michael Every

Adam Taggart | Thoughtful Money® Jun 16, 2026

Summary

The guest puts the odds below 50% that Iran truly gave up uranium enrichment, calling the announcement a memorandum of misunderstanding.

Oil prices fell only about 4% despite repeated Hormuz closure threats, which he reads as the market underpricing the risk of a renewed closure.

He expects the oil forward curve (future price expectations) to shift as a one-way wave of queued tankers hits the market after reopening.

Gulf states will keep building pipelines that bypass Hormuz whatever the deal says, locking in the region's energy Plan Bs.

China can ride out an oil cutoff for up to six months, so he expects the 60-day negotiation window to stretch past November's US midterms.

Top takeaway The host frames the interview as a test of the decade-old shift away from globalization toward nationalism and mercantilism, pressing Every to put probabilities rather than narrative on the US-Iran deal, Hormuz, proxies and a possible Iran deal for uranium.
Taggart argues that after the November midterms Trump will dial up geopolitical confrontation either way - dial out if he wins, dial up because the only way out is through if he loses - which he reads as implying more volatility ahead.

Top takeaway Every's top point: the words 'peace' and 'deal' are doing the heavy lifting - he puts the odds at under 50% that Iran actually agreed to give up enrichment or hand over uranium, so he treats the crisis as unresolved rather than settled.
He notes Trump has already said publicly that if the 60-day talks produce nothing on the nuclear front he will start bombing again, and has floated wanting a 20% cut in Middle East oil - not something Every reads as peace.
On the Strait of Hormuz, reopening is guided for Friday when the agreement is signed in Europe; oil was down only around 4% as of this interview, but he expects a shift in oil curves and a near-term wave of ships exiting that pushes energy prices and bond yields lower, and he sees no guarantee against a future closure.
He calls it 'not going to happen' that Iran defunds Hezbollah and the Houthis - they are a defensive shield and an offensive weapon, and US-imposed restraint on Israel collides with Israel's post-October 7 first-strike doctrine.
On the dollar he broadly shares the don't-count-it-out view that de-dollarization schemes, including the China-announced alternative payment rail he cites, are science projects unlikely to leave the lab - but warns a perceived comprehensive US loss would be a pivot point opening fissures in the dollar's global standing.