The ceasefire between the United States and Iran lasted 72 days. It collapsed not in a single moment but through a sequence of escalations that each made the next inevitable [1].

April 18: Ceasefire announced. Both sides agreed to halt offensive operations. The deal was brokered through Oman and included provisions for Hormuz reopening and sanctions relief talks. Neither side met its initial obligations [2].

May 3: Iran demanded the release of $6 billion in frozen assets as a precondition for Hormuz reopening. The US rejected the demand as outside the ceasefire framework. Negotiations stalled.

May 15: CENTCOM conducted what it described as a "defensive overflight" of Iranian airspace. Iran called it a violation. The IRGC placed its naval forces on heightened alert [3].

May 28: Houthi forces renewed threats against commercial shipping in the Red Sea. The US attributed the escalation to Iranian direction. Iran denied involvement. The ceasefire's geographic scope — which excluded proxy forces — created an ambiguity that both sides exploited.

June 2: Iran's ambassador to Moscow described Hormuz as "open but with transit fees." The statement was the first confirmation of the institutional framework behind the closure. The paper's June 9 edition identified the fee structure as an enforcement mechanism, not a diplomatic proposal [4].

June 8: The US launched strikes on sites in Karaj, Abyek, and Bandar Abbas. Iran described the strikes as a ceasefire violation. The US described them as responses to Iranian proxy actions [1].

June 9: Iran struck US bases in Iraq, Kuwait, and the UAE. The IRGC described the strikes as retaliation. CENTCOM confirmed damage to facilities but reported no fatalities [3].

June 10: The US launched additional strikes on Iranian sites in Qeshm, Kish, and Sirik. Iran closed Hormuz to all shipping. The ceasefire was functionally over [1].

The timeline reveals a pattern: each side used the ceasefire's ambiguities — proxy forces, airspace definitions, geographic scope — to escalate without technically violating the terms. The collapse was not a failure of the ceasefire. It was the ceasefire functioning as designed — a tactical pause that both sides used to prepare for the next phase [2].

-- YOSEF STERN, Jerusalem