A US-Iran peace deal that could reshape the Middle East is tantalizingly close — yet still unsigned — as both sides offer conflicting accounts of what has actually been agreed, even as military incidents continue in the Strait of Hormuz.
Pakistan’s Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif declared on June 12 that “a final, agreed-upon text of the peace deal has been reached,” with his country working to finalise next steps after months of mediating between Washington and Tehran. Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi added that the so-called Islamabad Memorandum of Understanding had “never been closer.” Yet within hours of those statements, the United States downed multiple Iranian drones targeting commercial ships in the Strait of Hormuz — underscoring just how fragile the moment remains.
What Is on the Table?
According to US officials, the emerging framework would require Iran to dismantle its nuclear programme, surrender its enriched uranium stockpile, and reopen the Strait of Hormuz to commercial shipping. In return, Tehran would receive significant sanctions relief and the unfreezing of Iranian assets — but only after demonstrating compliance. A senior White House official put the likelihood of a signed agreement at “80 to 85 percent,” adding that a location and date had not yet been finalised, though Switzerland has offered to host the signing.
Iran’s account of the deal differs considerably. State media outlet Mehr News Agency, citing a source close to the negotiating team, reported that the agreement would see $24 billion in frozen Iranian assets released over a 60-day negotiation period, with half available to Iran before formal talks even begin. Iranian state broadcaster IRNA separately reported that Tehran would retain its right to enrich uranium and maintain a role in managing traffic through the Strait of Hormuz — positions directly at odds with the White House version.
Trump, Tehran, and the War of Narratives
The gap between the two sides’ public statements has generated significant friction. President Donald Trump accused Iran of “negotiating in bad faith,” saying the terms leaked to media “have nothing to do with the terms that were agreed to, in writing.” He also condemned continued attacks on shipping in the Strait as “totally unacceptable.”
Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Esmaeil Baqaei pushed back, saying an agreement had been reached “on most points,” while Araghchi insisted the MoU had not yet been signed and urged media to “refrain from entering speculation about its content.”
US Vice President JD Vance also weighed in, dismissing reports that Iran would receive an immediate cash payment, saying “no funds are being released for simply signing a deal or attending a meeting.” He added that economic benefits would flow to Iran only if it met its obligations under the agreement.
Israel’s Red Lines
Israel is not a party to the memorandum of understanding but has made its concerns known at the highest level. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu spoke with Trump and expressed appreciation for assurances that any final agreement would require Iran to surrender its enriched nuclear material, dismantle enrichment infrastructure, limit missile production, and end support for regional militant groups including Hezbollah in Lebanon.
Iranian state media, however, reported that the dismantling of Iran’s nuclear infrastructure was not currently on the table, and that Tehran’s right to enrich uranium would be “emphasised” in final negotiations — setting up a potential flashpoint between Israel and any emerging deal.
The Strait of Hormuz: Still Contested
The strategic waterway at the heart of the conflict remains a major sticking point. The US military has been conducting what Trump described as undisclosed operations in and around the Strait for months, redirecting commercial ships and disabling Iranian vessels. US Central Command confirmed it had redirected 136 vessels and disabled nine others as part of blockade enforcement operations.
Araghchi confirmed that a draft deal would require the complete lifting of the US naval blockade of Iranian ports, adding that “the administration of the Strait of Hormuz will no longer be the same as before.” Discussions with Oman on the matter are ongoing.
Trump, for his part, predicted the Strait would “open as soon as we have it signed,” and linked a deal to a sharp fall in global oil prices, which have remained elevated since the war began in late February.
Lebanon and the Regional Dimension
The scope of any agreement extends beyond Iran’s borders. Both US officials and Iranian state media have indicated that Lebanon would be included in a final deal, covering a cessation of hostilities on all fronts. Araghchi stated that Iran “will never leave Lebanon alone,” while the senior US official confirmed the deal “includes Lebanon, Iran, Gulf Coast countries, and Israel.”
What Experts Say
Analysts have urged caution about what the “deal” actually amounts to at this stage. Robert Satloff, executive director of the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, suggested the most realistic near-term outcome may be a limited extension of the existing ceasefire rather than a sweeping peace agreement. “Unconditional surrender is not on the table. Regime change is not on the table,” Satloff said, adding that issues like Iran’s missiles and proxy networks were unlikely to be resolved in an initial framework.
What Happens Next
If an agreement is signed, a 60-day negotiation period on Iran’s nuclear programme and the full lifting of US sanctions would follow. Iran has indicated that final nuclear talks will proceed only within the “fundamental principles of the Islamic Republic,” including retention of enriched material — a position that guarantees continued friction with both Washington and Tel Aviv.
For now, the world watches and waits. Markets have responded positively to reports of an imminent deal, with global stock indices rising and oil prices slipping. But with drones still flying over the Strait and both sides offering competing narratives, the finish line remains in sight — if not yet crossed.
