Although the usual suspects are attacking Donald Trump on the Iran deal, the actual Memorandum of Understanding with Iran ending the current round of hostilities is actually a win for the United States – and a political boon for the president. Perhaps that’s why his critics are so quick to criticize it. It’s important to keep basic facts in mind:

1) The United States and Israel commenced hostilities on Feb. 28, shortly after Iran’s negotiating team told U.S. negotiators Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner that Iran had enough highly enriched uranium to swiftly assemble 11 nuclear bombs and retained the “inalienable right to enrich all their nuclear fuel.”

“That’s how they opened up,” Witkoff said. “We, of course, responded that the president feels we have the inalienable right to stop you, dead in your tracks.”

Over the ensuing weeks, the U.S. exercised that right and destroyed Iran’s existing enrichment capability and otherwise degraded its current ability to move towards assembling a nuclear bomb.

In the Memorandum of Understanding, Iran reiterated (again) that it will never have a nuclear bomb, as it did in the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons and Obama’s agreement with Iran. However, unlike President Obama’s agreement with Iran, the MOU does not affirm Iran’s right to enrich uranium. Instead, the MOU provides for the “disposition” of the existing enriched uranium in a manner to be agreed upon and provides for further discussions over Iran’s nuclear needs going forward.

So the combination of the destruction of Iran’s current capabilities and the terms of the MOU, including providing for the “disposition” of the enriched uranium, represents a substantial reduction in the global risk from Iran’s nuclear program and a significant step towards eliminating this threat altogether.

2) The U.S. and Israel killed more than 50 senior Iranian officials and more than 5,000 members of Iran’s Revolutionary Guard Corp during the “kinetic phase” of the engagement with Iran. The U.S. lost 15 service members, with as many as 500 wounded. By contrast, the U.S. lost 4,492 soldiers in the Iraq war. President Trump aggressively pursued his strategic goals at a human cost far less than in previous Middle East conflicts.

3) The geography of the Strait of Hormuz, and Iran’s ability to wreak havoc on shipping through the strait, has always been a risk factor in dealing with Iran. Iran finally played that card, which it had increasingly threatened to do – and was bound to eventually.

The economic shock, however, has been temporary – and, in the scheme of things, minor. From the commencement of hostilities on Feb. 28 until today, the U.S. S&P 500 stock index closed with 20 new highs. Over the same period of time, the Iranian currency has become essentially worthless and its economy is in freefall.

4) Trump’s critics say that by tacitly acceding to Iran’s territorial claims over the Strait of Hormuz, Iran is now in a stronger strategic position then it was prior to the war. This overlooks that the U.S. also closed the Strait, eliminated Iran’s ability to track ships transiting the Strait, and quietly broke Iran’s blockade and has now reopened the Strait through the MOU.

What are the strategic implications of this series of events? First, the administration demonstrated to China that the U.S. has potential control over China’s oil imports from the region. So, in the ongoing strategic competition between China and the United States, if China threatens to cut off rare earth exports, China knows the U.S. can cut off its imports of oil. In addition, the U.S. Navy has demonstrated its ability to totally dominate this vital sea lane, and with no recorded casualties, quietly reopened the Strait of Hormuz without Iran’s situational awareness. Oil exporting nations in the region are now investing in alternate routes, including new investments in pipelines, to mitigate Iran’s geographic risk to the flow of oil exports.

5) The MOU has moved Iran closer to accepting a nuclear-free future, while also providing a respite for the U.S. and the rest of the global economy from the economic impact of shutting off the flow of oil from the region. As a result, oil will flow, enabling countries around the world to refresh dwindling reserves and lowering gasoline prices Americans pay at the pump – thereby addressing a major political concern going into midterm elections Trump is determined to win.

Note in this regard that the MOU provides for immediate steps to allow Iran to sell oil, even before the final deal is reached. This provision benefits both Iran and the U.S.: while Iran can start generating income from sales for rebuilding, Americans will benefit from even lower oil prices sooner, presumably strengthening Trump’s hand going into the midterm elections.

6) The MOU moves the war, which has not enjoyed majority support from voters, from the front burner to the back burner – out of sight, and out of mind for voters. As gas prices fall rapidly over the summer, the president will focus the electorate on positive economic news.

Note that this is only a memorandum of understanding, not a binding final agreement, that contemplates that a “final” agreement will be negotiated on these and other terms raised by the parties in the next 60 days.

Iranians are notoriously difficult to negotiate with, so the window for negotiations is likely be extended. Then, the election will occur shortly after the second 60-day period expires, and once the election occurs, the immediate political pressure to end the war disappears for at least a year.

The MOU should be seen as a strategic pause in our “clenched fist, open hand” negotiations with Iran. It’s a means of nudging the Iranians closer to agreeing to become a “normal” nation again, while buying the Trump administration time before the midterms, after which the administration will have more freedom to utilize force to drive further change in Iran.

If Iran were really somehow stronger in the wake of our “kinetic” assault on Iran, then Iran would never have agreed to this MOU.

Iran has unquestionably been weakened. Like Monty Python’s infamous Black Knight, it has lost both arms and, though still defiantly insisting it isn’t dead yet, risks losing what little leverage it has left after the midterm elections – unless it cuts a deal that works for President Trump now.

This article was originally published by RealClearPolitics and made available via RealClearWire.