WSJ What’s News - Will Israel and Iran’s Cease-Fire Hold?

Episode Date: June 24, 2025

A.M. Edition for June 24. After a week and a half of fighting, Israel and Iran say they’ve agreed to a cease-fire. Journal deputy Middle East bureau chief Shayndi Raice says despite the deal being confirmed by President Trump on social media yesterday evening, fresh missile attacks by Iran are raising questions about its longevity. Plus, NATO allies look set to more than double defense spending as they meet in The Hague today. And banks are hiking fees on their most exclusive credit cards, testing the limits of loyal customers. Luke Vargas hosts. Sign up for the WSJ’s free What’s News newsletter. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Americans love using their credit cards, the most secure and hassle-free way to pay. But DC politicians want to change that with the Durbin Marshall credit card bill. This bill lets corporate megastores pick how your credit card is processed, allowing them to use untested payment networks that jeopardize your data security and rewards. Corporate megastores will make more money and you pay the price. Tell Congress to Guard Your Card because Americans lose when politicians choose. Learn more at GuardYourCard.com. Israel and Iran agree to stop fighting. We'll get the latest. Plus, NATO allies gathered

to set a major increase in defense spending in stone. Some countries such as Spain, Belgium, Italy have had trouble hitting just 2 percent. So whether they'll be able to hit 5 percent is an open question. But at least people are committing to try to hit that. And we'll look at why it might be time to check your credit card statement for what could be an unexpectedly large annual fee. It's Tuesday, June 24th. I'm Luke Vargas for the Wall Street Journal, and here is the AM edition of What's News,

the top headlines and business stories moving your world today. Israel and Iran say they have agreed to a ceasefire to end a week and a half of fighting. President Trump announced the deal on social media yesterday evening. We report that Qatar helped to secure Iran's agreement just hours after Tehran had attacked a U.S. base in the country, while an official statement from Israel confirmed its acceptance of the ceasefire, noting that it had achieved its war aims. But is the deal holding? Shandy Race is the journal's deputy Middle East bureau chief. Shandy, what is the latest?

We've got reports of this deal being agreed to by both sides, and yet also reports of Iranian missiles landing in Israel hours after that. What's going on here? It's a very good question. It's still very unclear right now. Yes, both sides have agreed to a ceasefire. Not too long after the ceasefire was agreed to, Iran launched some missiles towards northern Israel. So Israel responded that they're going to forcefully respond to Iran. Now, I would say that in my experience with these

kinds of ceasefires, you very often see one last launch even after the ceasefire has been agreed to. It's kind of like people getting in their last licks So the question is just gonna be can they keep this contained to a quick tit-for-tat? Or will it quickly spiral out of control and the ceasefire will fall apart really before it's even started Maybe Shady it would be helpful as a way of trying to handicap the odds of of this being a successful ceasefire It's just trying to understand the willingness from both sides to actually get to this point. I think both sides very much want to get to this point. I think it's just a question of saving face.

We reported yesterday that Israel was ready to wrap up its fighting. We had been told by our sources that Israel was very close in the coming days to completing its top target list on the Iranian side. The biggest clue that we had that Iran was ready to wrap it up is that they didn't go for a major escalation with the United States after the United States struck their nuclear facilities. They did launch an attack on an American base in Qatar, but there were no casualties and they had given a heads up to the US and none of the missiles hit. Is there anything else we should be watching for next besides the skies to see if attacks are continuing?

I think the biggest question from what I can tell is not so much about whether attacks are going to be continuing in the short term, but what is going to be the long term repercussions of this? Mostly how significantly has Israel and the United States damaged Iran's nuclear capabilities? What will happen to Iran now? Will they back down? Will it take them years to rebuild? Will it take them months?

Will they try to go underground and pull out of any sort of diplomatic agreements that would allow for oversight of their nuclear program? And the reason that that's important is because that will determine whether Iran and Israel get into another round of fighting in the future. And so if Israel is only set Iran back for a few months and very soon we see Iran trying to rebuild, this could force Israel to decide that they have to intervene again militarily. And then we could be back to where we are. SHANE D. RICE is the Journal's Deputy Middle East Bureau Chief.

Thank you so much for filling us in on these details. Thanks, Luke. [♪ Journal of Brussels bureau chief Dan Michaels is there Dan as far as I understand there isn't a direct NATO link to the fighting lately involving Israel the US and Iran But I imagine it is very much on the minds of Alliance members who are due to have some Pretty difficult weighty conversations about defense spending military readiness indeed Iran is sort of hanging over conversations here in the Hague today and tomorrow. One of the big lessons learned from recent events, both in Iran and also in Russia, where Ukraine staged the dramatic drone strike a few weeks ago, is that military hardware can be very vulnerable on the ground before it's deployed.

One of the reasons the Israelis were very successful in their strikes on Iran last week was the Israeli agents on the ground apparently knocked out air defenses before the air strikes started. So NATO is starting to think a lot more about how to protect its forces and homelands before there's a war. We hope that there won't be a war. And one way that NATO officials say to avoid that is to make it clear that NATO is ready to fight if it needs to. And being ready to fight means not just having tanks

in armories and equipment like that, airplanes sitting in airfields. It's making sure that they are ready to deploy and able to deploy, that the highways can carry them, the ports are able to move equipment off of ships, the telephone systems work, and the government can continue functioning. And these are issues that NATO for the first time is going to specifically devote money to. Specifically devote money to. And there are other sort of firm pledges around military spending or increases in military spending that I understand NATO leadership wants to leave this summit having inked basically.

That is the big deliverable of this summit. NATO has agreed in principle and it's going to be essentially carved in stone here to more than double defense spending from a previous pledge of 2% of gross domestic product economic output that was agreed in 2014. And the event really will be essentially a victory lap for President Trump, who will be able to say that he pushed the other NATO members to agree to 5%. It's an open question whether everyone will be able to meet the target over coming years. Some countries such as Spain, Belgium, Italy have had trouble hitting just 2%. So whether they'll be able to hit 5% is an open question. But at least people are committing to try to hit that.

And even if the direction is achieved, the defense and military spending are increased significantly, that's the main thing that NATO wants to achieve, to just be more ready in case of hostilities? The big fear is from Russia. We'll be tracking it closely. Dan Michaels is The Wall Street Journal's Brussels Bureau Chief. Dan, thanks so much for the update. Good talking with you.

Thanks. Coming up, we've got the rest of the day's news as the Supreme Court weighs in on deporting migrants to third-party countries and voting ends in New York City's heated Democratic primary. Those stories and more after the break. Active Fixed Income ETFs from Hartford Funds. Built to help you navigate complex bond markets with the affordability of an ETF. Actively managing your fixed income is actively managing your client's future.

Learn more at HartfordFunds.com slash active. Investing involves risk. Carefully consider a fund's investment objectives, risks, charges, and expenses before investing. Visit HartfordFunds.com to obtain a prospectus containing this and other information. Read it carefully before investing. Alps distributors. The Supreme Court has cleared the way for the Trump administration to swiftly send migrants facing final deportation orders to countries that they aren't from.

The Court's conservative majority stayed a lower court order that had said individuals on track to be deported to third countries must be given meaningful notice of their destination, giving them time to object. Crucially, the Supreme Court's order doesn't resolve questions about the Trump administration's legal obligations to the migrants, an issue that is continuing to be litigated in lower courts. After months of intense campaigning, voting is ending today in New York City's Democratic Mayoral Primary.

A poll released yesterday shows former Governor Andrew Cuomo likely to top a first round of rank choice voting, but Democratic Socialist Zoran Mamdani winning after eight rounds, as supporters of less popular candidates have their votes redistributed. The race between Cuomo, who resigned as governor in 2021 following sexual harassment claims he's denied, and Mamdani, a progressive less than half of Cuomo's age, is viewed by some voters as a referendum on the future of the Democratic Party, and the candidates played up that contrast in their final advertising blitz. L.A. is in chaos.

Now Trump's coming for New York. You think a 33-year-old legislator who's passed three bills can stop him? Andrew Cuomo's managed a state and managed crises from COVID to Trump. We need someone experienced to stop him. Billionaires and corporations, the same people who put Donald Trump back in the White House are now trying to elect Andrew Cuomo. They're spending all this money for a very simple reason. Corporations don't want to pay just a little bit more in taxes to make a better city for all of us. We'll bring you the results from the primary tomorrow morning. We are exclusively reporting that nearly 2 million student loan borrowers are at risk of having their pay docked by the government this summer, with their tax returns and benefits also at risk.

That says credit reporting company TransUnion says roughly six million federal student loan borrowers are 90 days or more past due after the Education Department restarted collections on defaulted student loans in May following a pandemic-era reprieve. A third of those borrowers could move into default this month and millions more by September. Borrowers could see up to this month and millions more by September. Borrowers could see up to 15% of their wages automatically deducted from their paychecks until past due payments are paid in full or their default status is resolved. And if you thought that your premium credit card was costing you just a nominal fee, think

again. That's because companies like JPM Morgan Chase are raising prices on their most exclusive credit cards by as much as 45 percent, while American Express is expected to hike its six hundred and ninety five dollar fee this fall. Increases that journal reporter Jacob Passi says are taking some customers by surprise. We spoke with one person who wasn't even aware of what he was paying to begin with. So to him, the new annual fee was quite eye-popping. For other folks like an investment baker named Jacob Moon, who we spoke to, they're more

concerned about the fine print that comes with the benefits attached to the card than he is with the annual fee. So for him, it almost is beginning to feel like homework to redeem the benefits and rewards that come with the card. So to him, that's a bigger issue than how much the card itself costs. And also, a lot of people simply appreciate these cards for the exclusivity associated with them. It's becoming kind of a status symbol to have a Chase Sapphire Reserve or an Amex Platinum card in your wallet. But even if some customers are turned off by the higher fees, Jacob said the move still makes sense for issuers.

For starters, they would be more interested in keeping the revenue from more devoted customers. The more likely you are to use the card, the more they benefit because they make a lot of money off of the interchange fees that they charge to merchants. So, the more they benefit because they make a lot of money off of the interchange fees that they charge to merchants. So to them, they would rather have someone who's going to use this card as the primary card in their wallet than someone who might open it, might claim some of the benefits, but otherwise not use it. So they're not too worried at this point about the drop-off they might. But of course, if fees keep going up and that changes consumer behavior, I think you could see a response.

And that's it for What's News for this Tuesday morning. Today's show was produced by Daniel Bach and Kate Bullivant. Our supervising producer was Sandra Kilhoff. And I'm Luke Vargas for The Wall Street Journal. We will be back tonight with a new show. Until then, thanks for listening.