John Kerry, the former U.S. Secretary of State and architect of the 2015 Iran nuclear deal, has publicly criticized the Trump administration’s recent memorandum of understanding aimed at ending the conflict with Iran. Announced on Sunday and set for a ceremonial signing in Geneva on Friday, the agreement intends to reopen the Strait of Hormuz and lift the United States’ naval blockade in the region. However, key details about the deal remain unclear.

Speaking from Kenya, where he was attending a conference, Kerry characterized the new agreement as an attempt by the Trump administration to “dig itself out of a hole they dug themselves.” He emphasized that the 2015 deal, which he helped negotiate under President Barack Obama, had kept Iran’s nuclear program in check until Trump withdrew the U.S. from the accord during his first term. According to Kerry, this withdrawal set “a predictable, avoidable eight year trajectory” leading to intensified Iranian nuclear activity and increasing the likelihood of war.

Kerry expressed hope for renewed diplomatic efforts that could restore elements of the original deal, such as the removal of enriched uranium stockpiles and the resumption of international inspections. He also raised concerns about the lack of clarity regarding how the new memorandum addresses not only Iran’s nuclear ambitions but also its support for regional groups such as Hezbollah.

The announcement drew a mixed response from Capitol Hill. Some lawmakers, including Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman Jack Reed, criticized Trump’s Iran policy, arguing that the current U.S. position has weakened the country’s standing compared to the Obama administration’s approach. Many Republicans have called for more information and briefings about the specifics of the agreement.

Kerry, who engaged in behind-the-scenes diplomacy after leaving office to try to salvage the 2015 deal, has consistently challenged Trump’s hardline stance on Iran. Earlier in the year, Kerry condemned Trump’s threats to “wipe out a whole civilization” in Iran as a step toward potentially committing war crimes. Meanwhile, the international community remains uncertain about the potential implications of the new deal, with some observers questioning what the long-term benefits of the agreement might be beyond reopening key regional waterways.

As the formal signing approaches, the administration faces ongoing scrutiny from both domestic political figures and international stakeholders seeking clarity on how the new agreement will impact the broader Middle East security landscape.