Ceasefire in Iran: Waiting for 'Chronicle of a Death Foretold'

“On the day they were going to kill him, Santiago Nasar got up at five-thirty in the morning to wait for the boat the bishop was coming on. He’d dreamed he was going through a grove of timber fig trees where a gentle drizzle was falling, and for an instant he was happy in his dream, but when he awoke he felt completely spattered with bird shit. ‘He was always dreaming about trees,’ his mother, Plácida Linero, told me later, reminiscing about the details of that fateful Monday twenty-seven years after the fact.” So begins 'Chronicle of a Death Foretold' by Gabriel Garcia Marquez, one of the giants of contemporary literature (Trans. Gregory Rabassa). That is the title in Turkish; however, the original Spanish title translates to our language as: “The Story of a Murder Everyone Knew Would Be Committed.”

The subject of this short work is indeed a murder that everyone knows will be committed; yet the people of the town where the incident takes place do nothing to prevent this murder, nor do they feel the need to. We are not dealing with an ordinary detective novel; the opening sentence, where the murder is “announced,” already reveals this. The real issue in the novel is why the townspeople allowed the murder to take place.

Writing a review for The New York Times on the occasion of the book’s translation into English just two years after its 1981 publication, American author Leonard Michaels makes the following observation: “All our deaths are, in a way, like a mysterious murder. Because we don’t know exactly why we have to die. Every effort to explain or rationalize our fate within the linear order of a story inevitably turns into absurdity.”

Marquez

The Islamabad Agreement was signed on June 17, 2026, by US President Donald Trump at the ominous Palace of Versailles and by Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian in Tehran. Trump extended his thanks to Pakistan, Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and Egypt, who undertook the role of mediation. The fourteen-article text has occupied the world agenda for the last week. With the exception of Israel (government, opposition, and media alike), the entire world welcomed this development with happiness. Indeed, as a result of the war that broke out on February 28, 2026, the global economy had suffered massive damage, and only a very small fraction of its impact has been felt so far.

As soon as the agreement was signed, there is one point on which “experts” from all four corners of the world—a group that can include dozens, even hundreds of academics, politicians, diplomats, journalists, researchers, and even ordinary citizens—agree: 'Chronicle of a Death Foretold' is closer than ever. Interestingly, unlike the scenes we are accustomed to from the history of diplomacy and international relations, the reason for this is not the signatory parties. The responsibility lies elsewhere.

First, let us look at the effects of the war and why the global economy necessitated a ceasefire and even “peace.”

We are all part of a world economy today that is more integrated and intricate than ever before in history. There are several chokepoints that form the lifeblood of an economy connected by supply chains. The Strait of Hormuz is one of them.

Therefore, the closure of Hormuz, one of the lifelines of global finance-capitalism, by Iran through a strategic move was a clever maneuver from their perspective. Indeed, when you corner a “cat,” it is hard to be sure what it will do. Even if it is to its own detriment, in order to survive and create space for itself, it can inflict this kind of damage on a complex economic order that would bring about doomsday if wounded.

When you corner a “cat,” it is hard to be sure what it will do.

Just four months ago, an average of over 20 million barrels of oil and a very large volume of liquefied natural gas (LNG) were passing through this strait daily. This amount corresponds to approximately one-third of the world’s seaborne oil trade and a significant portion of the LNG trade. There is no need to underline the importance of Hormuz for the Asian continent, especially China, India, Japan, and South Korea, and for Europe. In the analyses published immediately after the war began, there was an expectation of a price increase of around 20 percent in oil markets in the long term, and it was stated that this increase would not decrease until the end of the year, even if Hormuz were opened now. Moreover, we have already exceeded this 20 percent threshold since the war began…

Such being the case, it is impossible not to be surprised at how shortsightedly and unsuccessfully the hawkish wing, which has been planning for war with Iran for over forty years, prepared for this point. Because, as of now, “regime change,” which was repeatedly stated as one of the goals of the war, has not been mentioned for a long time, and Tehran’s projects related to armament and nuclear energy seem solvable in the direction they want, at least within the fourteen articles.

Trump, who expressed that he was a “peace candidate” in his election campaign preparing for his second term and said he was against a war with Iran, has returned to this realistic and pragmatic point today. We will wait and see how long this continues. On the other hand, it is important to state that the President, who has always been outspoken about US foreign policy and has directed the most accurate criticisms, has used words regarding Israel in recent days that no leader in his country’s history has been able to utter. Again, US Vice President J. D. Vance’s statements regarding Israel, such as “the only world leader who sympathizes with them is Trump,” are significant. So much so that these words even led to reactions in the Israeli public and the circles they influence within the US, such as “Vance is not our candidate in the 2028 elections.”

I think it is possible to summarize the situation of the last week in this way without going further into the articles of the agreement and the process. Everything after this point is now “Chronicle of a Death Foretold.”

It would not be an exaggeration to say that the first reaction of billions of people after the signatures were put on the agreement was the same: “Israel will do its best to sabotage this.” And again, it is a requirement of this logical framework to say that billions of people were right: On June 19 alone, 83 people were massacred in Lebanon, where it was stated in the agreement text that hostilities should cease (it was announced by Lebanese officials that Israel has killed more than 4,000 people since March). Subsequently, the planned Geneva talks between Iran and the US were suspended on the same day, and Iran closed Hormuz again (delegates from both sides arrived in Geneva on June 21, but the Strait is currently closed).

It seems that Israeli politicians, the public, and social media users who accuse the US President and his deputy of treason are still unaware of the situation. We are talking about such a situation that even former US Secretary of State and Trump’s arch-rival Hillary Clinton gave tacit support to the administration with a confession she made on June 15, 2026. According to Clinton, Netanyahu had made “obsessive” and “persistent” calls for the US to bomb Iran between 2009 and 2013. Likewise, according to a report in The Washington Post dated June 19, 2026, American intelligence is of the opinion that “Netanyahu may take steps to prevent the peace agreement with Iran.”

Putting aside the politics of blaming a single “scapegoat” for the disaster of recent years, the US is currently taking realistic and pragmatic steps. Let us hope that the American architects of this “peace” or the “peace” itself do not meet the same fate as Santiago Nasar. Let us hope that the “townspeople” can prevent the murder this time. Because despite all our love for peace, another “Red” Book presents us with the theory of why “Chronicle of a Death Foretold” is inevitable:

“War is the highest form of struggle for resolving contradictions, when they have developed to a certain stage, between classes, nations, states, or political groups.” (Mao, “Problems of Strategy in China's Revolutionary War”, December 1936, Selected Works, Vol. I, p. 180).

The contradiction between Israel and Iran has not yet ended. Likewise, the contradiction between imperialism and the peoples and states of the region remains in place. On the other hand, there are many contradictions within the imperialist bloc, as the verbal sparring, arguments, and accusations from the primary sources show. Let us hope…