USIsrael

US says the decisions follow Iran’s commitment to allow international nuclear inspections.

Qatar’s PM Sheikh Mohammed bin Abdulrahman Al Thani told Al Jazeera that safeguards have been put in place to prevent US-Iran negotiations from regional escalation, including tensions in Lebanon and the Strait of Hormuz, stressing diplomacy and respect for agreements.

The move, expected under the MoU, comes as Vice President JD Vance says there’s a ‘good foundation’ for a final deal.

The United States has partially lifted sanctions on Iranian oil exports following “encouraging” talks over ending their conflict.

The US Treasury issued a 60-day sanctions waiver on Monday, paving the way for the production, delivery and sale of Iranian oil to the US. The move came amid positive reports from mediators and the US vice president regarding talks in Switzerland between Washington and Tehran aimed at establishing a full peace deal.

The waiver is a condition included in the 60-day memorandum of understanding (MoU) signed by Tehran and Washington on June 17.

US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said that the US-Iran talks have been “productive” and that several of the MoU’s stipulations are moving ahead.

“Iran has committed to free and open transit in the Strait of Hormuz and to permit International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) inspectors into their country,” he wrote on social media. “As part of the framework, Treasury has issued a temporary 60-day general licence authorising the production, delivery and sale of Iranian oil.”

The licence lasts through August 21 and covers crude oil, petrochemical products, or petroleum products of Iranian origin. It permits Iranian oil to be imported into the US but does not authorise transactions involving US-sanctioned North Korea or Cuba, or Russian-occupied Ukraine.

There was no immediate response from Iranian government officials.

Oil prices continued their recent decline upon news of the waiver, with Brent crude dropping over 3.5 percent to $77.7 per barrel.

‘Good foundation’

Bessent’s announcement came as US Vice President JD Vance voiced optimism over the Tehran-Washington discussions in the Swiss resort of Burgenstock.

“We laid a very good foundation for a successful final deal,” he told reporters and shrugged off yesterday’s online tit-for-tat between President Donald Trump and top negotiator Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf.

“Social media threats that they would walk out” did not come to fruition,” Vance noted. “There was a little bit of threatening, there was a little bit of whining, but at the end of the day the talks continued and we made great progress.”

Mediators at the talks said that Washington and Tehran had made “encouraging progress” at the first round, according to Reuters.

The vice president did not give a firm timeline for when nuclear inspections may start, but said conversations with the IAEA could happen as soon as Monday.

The US has said that the need to prevent Iran from developing a nuclear weapon was a key driver of its attacks, and demands that Tehran reopen its nuclear facilities to international oversight.

Iran has persistently rejected accusations that it seeks to develop a nuclear arsenal, insisting that its nuclear programme is purely for civilian purposes.

A busier waterway

Shortly before the waiver announcement, the Strait of Hormuz was reported to be seeing an increase in oil and gas tanker traffic, just two days after Iran said it would close the waterway again because of Israeli attacks on Lebanon.

Four Qatari-operated LNG tankers headed into the Gulf and through the strait on Monday, while two supertankers – which can carry up to four million barrels of crude oil – entered. One indicated its destination as the Iraqi port of Basra, according to ship tracking data.

Two smaller crude oil tankers, laden with just under two million barrels, sailed out of the waterway and into the Gulf of Oman on Monday, according to MarineTraffic.

“While daily transits remain below the 125 crossings prior to the Iran hostilities, the trend is positive,” said the shipping firm Clarksons.

The US has maintained that the strait was never closed for the second time and tracked 55 merchant ships loaded with more than 17 million barrels of oil on Saturday.

The first round of US-Iran talks has ended with both sides agreeing on a roadmap towards a final deal to be reached ‘within 60 days’. Iran said the negotiations resulted in waivers for oil exports and the release of some frozen assets. The parties have also agreed to a ‘de-confliction cell’ to monitor the ceasefire in Lebanon.

Iranian fans in Tehran watched their team secure a 0-0 draw against Belgium at the World Cup in Los Angeles, keeping hope alive for an unprecedented chance at the second round. Iran competes under strict US travel restrictions, which forced them to fly back to Mexico within hours of the draw, rather than remaining overnight for recovery.

In an exclusive interview, Professor and political analyst Mahjoub Zweiri breaks down what intentions behind US-Iran talks will result in.

Iranian armed forces say they’ve closed the Strait of Hormuz after Israeli attacks on Lebanon – just days after an agreement with the US reopen it.

Disruption to the crucial waterway has had a huge economic impact worldwide.

So, what happens next?

Presenter: Tom McRae

Guests:

Ian Ralby — Senior Fellow at the Center for Maritime Strategy and Associate Fellow with the International Law Programme at Chatham House

Mehran Kamrava — Professor of Government at Georgetown University in Qatar and Head of the Iranian Studies Unit at the Arab Center for Research and Policy Studies

Stavros Karamperidis — Associate Professor in Maritime Economics and Head of the Maritime Transport Research Group at the University of Plymouth

On June 14, the United States and Iran agreed to a framework to end their war. The Strait of Hormuz is to reopen, the bombing of Lebanon is to end and – most importantly – the killing is to stop. After more than 100 days of war that killed thousands, including Iran’s most senior leaders, and pushed the world economy to the brink, even a fragile truce feels like first light.

Let us welcome it, but also let us understand it. To grasp why this war happened, and the string of wars before it, we must name their common cause. That cause is “Greater Israel” – not the country of Israel but an idea of it – a terrible one. The idea of “Greater Israel” has been the cause of wars in Iraq, Gaza, Lebanon, Syria and Iran.

It holds that Israel should stretch over all of historic Palestine – from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean Sea – and to parts of neighbouring countries as well.  According to United States Ambassador to Israel Mike Huckabee, a fundamentalist Protestant whose geopolitical compass is set by biblical texts from 500 BC, “Greater Israel” stretches from the Nile to the Euphrates. Last summer, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu professed to be “very” attached to a vision of “Greater Israel” that, he said, takes in the Palestinian territories and neighbouring Arab lands.

This absurd and dangerous doctrine has two parents. The first are secular hardliners like Netanyahu who say that Israel must control all the land from the river to the sea to be safe, and damn the eight million Palestinians in the way.

The second is the Jewish supremacist creed of Israeli Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich and National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir that God gave the land to the Jews alone: There is, in Smotrich’s words, “no such thing as a Palestinian”. Asked recently how Israel should answer its collapsing global standing, Smotrich vowed Israel would not relinquish military control of the West Bank, Gaza, Lebanese or Syrian territory: “We won’t commit suicide to make them happy.”

“Greater Israel” is paranoia, megalomania and religious zeal braided into a single programme. The doctrine should have been repudiated on its first airing decades ago. Instead, it has driven Israel’s foreign and military doctrine for three decades – and has survived until today because Netanyahu has taken the US for a ride.

He has done it with two American constituencies: Jewish Zionists who love Israel and will forgive it anything and Christian Zionists who love the prophecy of the End Times and the Second Coming of Christ more than they love any living Palestinian or, for that matter, any living Israeli.

Delusion has led on to delusion, and the road has run from one war to the next.  We are 30 years into this fiasco now.

The war on Iran was simply the latest “Greater Israel” fantasy. The government of 90 million people was to be toppled in a single, glorious day. Of course, it did not happen. Israeli and American bombs killed Iran’s leaders on February 28, but that did not deliver the promised collapse. It resulted instead in thousands of dead, a choked Strait of Hormuz and a global oil shock.

We have seen this film before. The Israel-US plan to bring down President Bashar al-Assad in Syria was also meant to be quick, one or two years at the most. Instead came a dozen years of carnage, fed by a covert war armed and financed by the CIA with Israel’s ardent backing. The result was an ancient country reduced to rubble. The promised one-day victories always become decade-long graveyards.

US President Donald Trump has been battered by joining the “Greater Israel” delusion, and he knows it. The new agreement with Iran is his escape valve, a way out of a fatuous war that was never his to win.

That is precisely why Israel’s “Greater Israel” politicians are trying to strangle the new agreement in the cradle, for peace with Iran is a defeat for “Greater Israel”. Even after the deal was sealed, Israel has continued to bomb Lebanon, killing 47 people in a single day on Friday and another 32 on Saturday hours after a Lebanon-Israel ceasefire took effect.

Here is the deeper truth: “Greater Israel” is not saving Israel. It is killing it. The friction now visible between Trump and Netanyahu is only the surface. Beneath it lies the collapse of Israel’s standing throughout the world. According to a recent Pew opinion survey, the world now holds an overwhelmingly unfavourable view of Israel. In the US, Israel’s indispensable patron, six in 10 adults view it unfavourably.

A state that makes itself hated by the world, and by its only protector, is not pursuing security. It is threatening its own survival to feed a delusion.

So the way to peace in West Asia is to stop “Greater Israel”. End the war on Iran, stop the genocide in Gaza and halt the strangulation of the West Bank. Most importantly, do the thing the doctrine forbids, which is to create the State of Palestine as the 194th United Nations member state alongside the State of Israel on the 1967 lines with genuine security for both countries and a regional framework to guarantee it, which should include Israel’s withdrawal from Lebanon and Syria.

The Iran ceasefire makes the case in miniature: It was won not on the battlefield but through mediation. It became possible when Washington decided it wanted peace more than it wanted “Greater Israel’s” war.

Israel can survive, but not as “Greater Israel”, a disastrous idea that has marched it and the US from one war to the next.

The glimmer of hope today is real. Whether it becomes a true dawn depends on whether the US finally lets Palestine be born, and thereby lets Israel live. The Arab world and Iran need to keep insisting to the US that breaking with “Greater Israel” is the only path to lasting peace.

The views expressed in this article are the authors’ own and do not necessarily reflect Al Jazeera’s editorial policy.

Iranian and US officials are set for high stakes talks in Switzerland aimed at reinforcing the Memorandum of Understanding framework. Al Jazeera’s Osama Bin Javaid says intense diplomatic efforts have kept negotiations on track, but key disputes remain unresolved.

Lebanon to top the agenda as US and Iran to hold talks in Switzerland’s Burgenstock mediated by Qatar and Pakistan.

United States Vice President JD Vance has arrived in Switzerland for talks with Iran days after they signed a memorandum of understanding (MoU) aimed at ending the US-Israel war on Iran, which had sent oil prices soaring above $100 per barrel and rattled international markets.

The latest round of talks mediated by Pakistan and Qatar is scheduled on Sunday as Israel has intensified attacks on Lebanon, killing dozens of people on Saturday.

Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) announced on Saturday that it was closing the Strait of Hormuz, accusing Israel of violating the ceasefire in Lebanon. The Iranian delegation, including parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf and Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi, has also arrived in Switzerland.

Here’s what we know about the conflict, which has entered its 114th day:

Diplomacy

• The US and Iran are to hold high-level talks in Switzerland’s Burgenstock on Sunday with the US delegation led by Vance. US President Donald Trump’s special envoy Steve Witkoff and his son-in-law Jared Kushner are also part of the US delegation. Before departing for the talks, Vance told reporters he hoped to make “progress on the nuclear issue” and “on the Lebanon ceasefire issue”.
• Iran’s delegation, led by Ghalibaf and Araghchi, said its main goal is to ensure all parties fully implement the interim deal to end the war.
• Esmaeil Baghaei, spokesperson for Iran’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs, said the Iranian delegation “will be pressing for implementation” of US commitments outlined in the MoU and “seeking clarity on how exactly the other side intends to carry out those commitments”.
• Pakistani Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif and military chief Field Marshal Asim Munir have left for Burgenstock to take part in the talks. “Pakistan will continue to support and advance the implementation of the understandings reached between the Islamic Republic of Iran and the United States,” the Pakistani Ministry of Foreign Affairs said in a statement posted on X.
• Qatari Prime Minister Sheikh Mohammed bin Abdulrahman bin Jassim Al Thani is also expected to take part in the key talks as Israel’s Lebanon attacks threaten to unravel the deal signed electronically by Trump and his Iranian counterpart, Masoud Pezeshkian, on Thursday.
• Egypt will host a four-way meeting with the foreign ministers of Saudi Arabia, Turkiye and Pakistan amid the Iran-US talks. The group first met in Riyadh on March 18, followed by meetings in Islamabad on March 29 and Antalya on April 18, reflecting growing efforts by regional powers to address crises through regional diplomacy rather than external intervention.

In Iran

• Mohammad Mokhbar, adviser and assistant to Iranian Supreme Leader Mojtaba Khamenei, warned that Tehran will not accept a paper agreement unless Washington fully implements its commitments. In a post on X, Mokhbar said the US understood pressure in economic terms. “Americans understand the language of economics and cost-benefit better,” he wrote. “When the agreement remains just on paper, the flow of Middle East energy will also come to a halt.”

• Al Jazeera’s Mohammed Vall, reporting from Tehran, said the delegation from Tehran is going to drive home the idea that Iran is not going to move forward in the implementation of the MoU unless the Israelis abide by the agreement. “They say the Americans bear the responsibility for that and that the Americans have to guarantee that the Israelis comply,” he said.
• Iran’s ⁠oil ⁠industry will be a key testing ground ⁠for any final peace agreement ⁠with the US if Western parties remain committed to its ‌spirit, Oil Minister Mohsen Paknejad says. The ministry’s Shana news agency quoted Paknejad as ⁠saying that in a ⁠post-agreement era, Iran’s oil sector would offer the global ⁠economy significant investment ⁠opportunities and ⁠has hundreds of investment projects as well as technical ‌and operational partnership contracts ready to be ‌signed.
• Amir Ghalenoei, the coach of Iran’s national football team, has criticised increasingly difficult preparation conditions for the team before Sunday’s World Cup match against Belgium, saying “conditions have become even harder” than before their opening match with New Zealand. Iran have been based in Tijuana, Mexico, for the tournament and have been travelling to the US for Group G matches due to restrictions on their stay, an issue that has drawn scrutiny throughout the World Cup.

In the US

• Trump said there will be no tolls for passage through the Strait of Hormuz unless they are collected by the US. This came after the IRGC said it had closed the waterway, through which a fifth of global oil and liquefied natural gas supplies passed before the war.
• David Sacks, Trump’s technology adviser, has defended the US-Iran MoU, calling it “a tremendous achievement” and a better path than prolonged conflict. Speaking on the All-In Podcast on Saturday, Sacks dismissed calls to escalate, arguing a ground invasion of Iran would make no sense, given Iran’s size and could require as many as a million troops. He branded any such attempt a “suicide mission”.
• Members of the Democratic Party are continuing to criticise Trump over his handling of the war with Iran. Johnny Olszewski, a Democratic congressman from Maryland, said Trump’s “war of choice” was a “disaster” and argued that the agreement with Iran was already breaking down.

In Lebanon

• Five people were killed, among them a child, a woman and two elderly people, in an Israeli raid on the village of Sohmor in Lebanon’s western Bekaa Valley, according to the National News Agency (NNA), citing the Ministry of Public Health. Sunday’s report did not specify when the attack took place. Two people of Palestinian origin were killed in Rashidieh in southern Lebanon’s Tyre district, the NNA reported.
• The Times of Israel reported on Sunday that an Israeli soldier has been killed and 13 others wounded when a barrage of rockets and a drone struck the soldiers’ position in Kfar Tebnit in southern Lebanon.
• Israeli media reports said Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has ordered invading troops to hold fire in Lebanon except for those engaged in a battle raging on the Ali al-Taher Hills near Nabatieh.

Pakistan says talks between the United States and Iran which were postponed on Friday will begin in Switzerland on Sunday, as Tehran announced it was again closing the Strait of Hormuz because of continued Israeli attacks in Lebanon.

Iran’s foreign ministry spokesman, Esmail Baghaei, confirmed on Saturday that an Iranian delegation, including Parliament Speaker, Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, Foreign Minister, Abbas Araghchi and other senior officials, was heading to Switzerland.

In Washington, Vice President JD Vance confirmed that the top US negotiators Jared Kushner and Steve Witkoff were already in Switzerland working through technical details of anticipated negotiations on Iran’s nuclear programme.

Vance told Fox News that he expects to leave for Switzerland “sometime in the next couple of days” but acknowledged that “it’s always a delicate coordination dance.”

The planned meeting on Sunday will start technical-level negotiations towards a final US-Iran deal. That is after both sides signed a memorandum of understanding (MoU) earlier in the week declaring a permanent end to “military operations on all fronts”, including in Lebanon.

The MoU stipulates that a final deal should be reached within 60 days, “extendable with mutual consent”.

But even getting to the negotiating table following the MoU proved difficult. A round of talks originally planned for Friday was pushed back after Iran failed to send its delegation, as deadly Israeli strikes persisted in Lebanon.

Although Israel agreed to a renewed ceasefire with Hezbollah on Friday, its attacks in Lebanon continued into Saturday, killing at least 32 people, according to Lebanon’s civil defence and state media reports.

On Friday, Israeli attacks killed 83 people and wounded 141, Lebanon’s health ministry said.

Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) on Saturday announced it was re-imposing restrictions on the Strait of Hormuz over Israeli “crimes” in Lebanon and what it called a US violation of commitments to establish a ceasefire.

It warned ship crews not to approach the strategic waterway, saying their security would be at risk ⁠if they do.

Mohammad Mokhber, an adviser to Iran’s supreme leader, warned that the flow of energy in the Middle East would halt so long as the US-Iran agreement “remains only on paper”.

The US military said its forces were still operating in the “general area” of the Strait of Hormuz and “remain present and vigilant” to make sure “all aspects of the agreement with Iran are adhered to”. It said 55 commercial vessels had transited the strait on Saturday and that safe passage was still “intact”.

‘Things are moving backwards’

According to Pakistan’s foreign ministry, Pakistani and Qatari mediators will join the US-Iran talks on Sunday in the Swiss mountain resort of Burgenstock.

Reporting from there, Al Jazeera’s Osama bin Javaid said there has been a flurry of behind-the-scenes diplomatic activity ahead of the formal negotiations, with Qatar’s Prime Minister, Sheikh Mohammed bin Abdulrahman bin Jassim Al Thani, already holding meetings. Pakistan’s Foreign Minister, Ishaq Dar, has been holding talks in Egypt and Pakistan’s Interior Minister, Mohsin Naqvi, travelled to Iran.

Iranian foreign ministry spokesman Baghaei has signalled that progress may be scarce until Iran feels the US is living up to its end of the interim deal.

In comments broadcast by Iran’s IRIB, Baghaei said Iran “must naturally be very firm and serious in demanding fulfilment of obligations” considering the US’s past “failure to honour commitments”.

Al Jazeera’s James Bays, reporting from Burgenstock, said there are indications “things are moving backwards from when the MoU was signed”, citing Israel’s continued bombardment of southern Lebanon.

“The Iranians see this as a serious breach of the MoU,” he said. “Their first sanction was by not coming here. They have now utilised their best weapon by closing the Strait of Hormuz.

“Iran believes this tactic will help get things back on track with regard to southern Lebanon,” added Bays.

Iranian deputy foreign minister says Iran ‘ready to move forward’ on diplomacy with US, but war must end on all fronts.

Lawmakers and pro-Israel groups have issued calls for United States President Donald Trump to ask Congress to review a recent memorandum of understanding (MoU) designed to end the US-Israeli war with Iran.

They cite the Iran Nuclear Agreement Review Act (INARA) as a precedent. Passed in 2015, the law says any agreements with Iran related to its nuclear programme must be submitted to Congress for review and a possible vote of disapproval.

The act came into effect when former US President Barack Obama was negotiating the now-defunct Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) with Iran, and it remains on the books today.

US Senator Lindsey Graham was among the first lawmakers to invoke the act after this week’s memo was announced.

“Under our law, any nuclear deal with Iran will be sent to Congress for review and a vote. I look forward to reviewing the final product,” Graham, a longtime Iran hawk, wrote in a social media post on Sunday.

Critics, including some Democrats and pro-peace groups, have questioned the newfound interest in Congress asserting its powers, after Republicans repeatedly flouted the legislature’s authority during the war itself.

Some see the push as an effort to give the memorandum greater legitimacy, as Trump comes under fire for its terms. Others question whether Iran hawks are invoking INARA to push for a return to war.

Here’s what to know about the debate:

What does the law say?

INARA creates requirements for any agreement between the US and Iran “related to the nuclear program of Iran”, no matter “the form it takes” or whether the agreement is legally binding.

Ahead of its passage in 2015, it was championed by bipartisan opponents of the JCPOA. That deal, which saw Tehran curtail its nuclear programme and submit to regular inspections in exchange for sanctions relief, was subsequently subject to provisions of the law.

The law requires the president to submit the text of any agreement he strikes with Iran to Congress within five days, along with any related materials. That triggers a 30-day approval period.

During that period, members of Congress can choose to pass a joint resolution of disapproval to scuttle the deal.

Still, such a resolution would be subject to the presidential veto. A successful disapproval resolution would therefore require a two-third majority from both chambers to override any vetoes, an extremely high bar.

During the congressional review period, the president “may not waive, suspend, reduce, provide relief from, or otherwise limit the application of statutory sanctions with respect to Iran under any provision of law or refrain from applying any such sanctions pursuant to [the] agreement”, the law states.

Those terms could limit this week’s memorandum, as it includes sanctions relief for Iran.

Does INARA apply to the memorandum of understanding?

Trump has suggested he was open to sending the US-Iran memorandum to Congress, telling reporters earlier this week: “I like the idea. I mean, who wouldn’t approve it?”

But his administration has not yet done so. Administration officials have also not articulated a stance on whether or not they believes the memo is subject to the law. Trump, after all, has frequently denied needing congressional approval for his actions against Iran.

This week’s memorandum opens the Strait of Hormuz, lifts the US blockade on Iran’s ports, and halts fighting on all fronts, including in Lebanon.

It also immediately lifts US sanctions on Iran’s fossil fuel industry, while launching negotiations on the future of Iran’s nuclear programme, among other issues.

As part of the deal, both countries agree to maintain their nuclear “status quo” during ongoing negotiations, and Iran commits to diluting its highly enriched uranium “on site”, with details to be determined during the negotiations.

While Trump has yet to acknowledge INARA’s authority, legal experts from across the ideological spectrum have argued that his memorandum is subject to the law.

Tess Bridgeman, a legal adviser for the Obama White House, wrote that the law applies to “this new MoU, and any future final agreement that might be negotiated in the coming months”.

But in an article published in the policy forum Just Security, she argues that INARA should be repealed, so as to not impede the ongoing diplomacy.

“INARA was never an appropriate way for Congress to engage on Iran’s nuclear program, and that is even more true today,” Bridgeman wrote.

Jack Goldsmith, a Harvard Law School professor and fellow at the conservative American Enterprise Institute, also believes that the memorandum should trigger an INARA review.

He also notes that Trump’s commitment to “immediately” lift sanctions on Iran’s oil industry appears to run afoul of INARA.

“I don’t think the president has the authority under domestic law to issue these waivers,” Goldsmith wrote on the Executive Functions website.

Still, he anticipates that neither Congress nor the judicial branch will confront Trump over the issue.

Will Trump comply with the law?

Trump’s second term has been defined by a broad interpretation of presidential power.

His administration has previously flouted the US Constitution’s provision that Congress alone has the power to declare war.

Trump has maintained that Iran represented an “imminent threat” to the US, which allowed him to launch defensive strikes without congressional approval.

Administration officials have also argued that the president is not beholden to the legal requirement that he gain congressional approval within 60 days of launching an attack. The war, which started on February 28, has lasted nearly three and a half months.

In an interview with the news outlet Axios on Thursday, Trump mused that the war taught him there are “no limits” to his power as president.

It remains unclear if Trump will change course and embrace the congressional collaboration required for diplomacy under INARA.

In her article, Bridgeman argued that Trump could flout the law in whole or in part, particularly when it comes to the immediate sanctions relief, because his party controls Congress.

Goldsmith, meanwhile, pointed out that the administration could also try to argue that the memorandum only sets out terms to reach an eventual agreement and is not an agreement itself.

While Goldsmith believes that argument is faulty, he noted that “it’s doubtful that any institution will make the president comply with INARA”.

A newfound interest in congressional oversight?

Several pro-Israel groups, including The Jewish Institute for National Security of America (JINSA) and the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), have been among the loudest voices calling for congressional involvement in the deal.

Since the outset of the war, JINSA defended Trump’s claims that Iran represented an “imminent threat” to the US, thereby granting him authority to attack without congressional approval.

However, the group also called on Congress to pass an Authorisation for the Use of Military Force (AUMF) to bolster his actions.

Congress, however, has repeatedly sought and failed to re-assert over its authority to send the US to war.

Since February, several war powers resolutions have been introduced to halt US action against Iran and force Trump to engage with Congress.

Initially, several Democrats backed by AIPAC, including Senator John Fetterman, Representative Jared Moskowitz and Representative Josh Gottheimer, broke from the party to oppose those efforts.

Moskowitz and Gottheimer eventually shifted their stances in March to vote in favour of one of the resolutions. But Congress has yet to pass a bill with enough votes to overcome an eventual Trump veto.

Meanwhile, Republicans in both the House and Senate chose to ignore a 60-day deadline in May that legally required Trump to get congressional approval for continued military operations — or stop fighting.

In a statement on Friday, Democratic Senator Chris Van Hollen characterised the Republican embrace of INARA as evidence of hypocrisy.

“Republican senators who were AWOL [absent without leave] regarding their constitutional duties around STARTING the war against Iran all of a sudden demand that Congress play a role in STOPPING the war,” he wrote.

“A whole lot of warmongering going on.”

The value of Iran’s currency has risen by more than 15 percent against the US dollar, and its stock market has shattered records in the wake of the memorandum of understanding agreed between the United States and Iran on Sunday.

However, Iranians suffering for years from extremely high inflation and a plunging rial have found little economic relief as the prices of basic goods, such as food, remain high despite the diplomatic breakthrough.

The Iranian economy has suffered due to decades of US sanctions. The economic crisis was exacerbated after the US and Israel launched a war against Iran on February 28. As subsequent US naval blockade on Iranian ports further added to the misery of Iranians.

In Ferdowsi Street, the beating heart of Tehran’s foreign exchange market, the scene on Thursday was a stark departure from the panic of recent months. Exchange office boards flashed rapidly changing numbers as foreign currencies, led by the dollar, took a sharp dive.

“We closed our doors just hours before the official announcement of the US-Iran understanding at a rate of 1.8 million rials to the dollar,” Amir, a 35-year-old exchange office worker who asked to remain anonymous, told Al Jazeera. “Now it has fallen to 1.54 million rials, and we expect further declines.”

Amir noted a significant increase in sales volumes although buyers remained scarce as many anticipated the rial would strengthen further, potentially dropping to 1.4 million to the dollar or lower.

The recent gains mark a sharp turnaround. After the outbreak of the war, the exchange rate jumped to a historic peak of 1.9 million rials (190,000 tomans) to the dollar in March before settling at about 1.685 million just before recent attacks carried out despite a ceasefire.

A disconnect in the grocery aisles

Despite the rial’s recovery, a walk through Tehran’s grocery stores reveals a starkly different reality. For Iranians grappling with the economic fallout of crippling sanctions and the US naval blockade, the diplomatic thaw has yet to lower the cost of living.

Reza, a 42-year-old Tehran resident, told Al Jazeera that prices for daily staples like milk, cheese, cooking oil and flour remain unchanged. “They say the dollar dropped, but my shopping basket costs the same as last week,” he said. “This means the agreement hasn’t reached our pockets yet.”

From behind the cash register, 55-year-old shop owner Ramin echoed his customer’s frustration. He explained that while the government continues to distribute subsidised goods like bread, the fluctuations of the free-market dollar do not immediately impact basic food prices.

The value of the dollar on the free market varies from the official exchange rate.

Pointing to a shelf of imported goods, another shopkeeper named Karim noted that items like shampoo, toothpaste and laundry detergent are still locked at inflated prices.

“Distributors say they bought these goods two months ago at the old dollar rates,” Karim explained. “Prices will remain high until the old stock runs out and new goods enter at the lower exchange rates.” He estimated it would take at least two weeks for the market to adjust, meaning Iranians will continue to face compounding inflation in the interim.

Euphoria on the trading floor

While Main Street struggles, Tehran’s stock market is experiencing an unprecedented boom amid expectations of improved economic conditions. The trading floor has been awash in green since the initial leaks of the Washington-Tehran agreement emerged.

On Monday, the main index jumped by a record-breaking 161,000 points in a single session, marking the highest-ever influx of cash from individual investors.

By Tuesday, the market continued its staggering ascent, climbing another 112,000 points to cross the psychological barrier of 5 million, ultimately settling at a historic high of 5.1 million.

Saeed, a 40-year-old investor, called it a “historic day”. He noted that investors are rushing to buy shares in the energy and petrochemical sectors, betting heavily on the resumption of exports and the reopening of global markets.

However, Saeed remained cautiously optimistic. “The stock market is often driven by rumours,” he warned. “I don’t want to repeat the experience of the 2015 nuclear deal when the market soared and then collapsed after the US withdrawal.”

He was referring to US President Donald Trump’s 2018 withdrawal from the agreement, under which Iran agreed to restrictions on its nuclear programme in exchange for sanctions relief.

Stagnation in real estate and electronics

The wait-and-see approach in effect has paralysed other sectors of the economy. In central Tehran’s electronics hubs, 38-year-old shop owner Reza reported that while the prices of imported appliances have dropped in tandem with the dollar, sales have stalled because customers are holding out for steeper discounts.

A similar freeze has gripped the housing market. Nasrin, a 36-year-old real estate agent in northern Tehran, observed that a recent price surge that accompanied the initial truce has now given way to stagnation. Many property owners are clinging to inflated prices, seemingly unaware that the market dynamics have shifted, bringing property transactions to a virtual standstill.

‘Not a magic wand’

For macroeconomic experts, the mixed market signals are entirely expected. Hossein Selahvarzi, the former head of the Iran Chamber of Commerce, Industries, Mines and Agriculture, cautioned that the new agreement is “not a magic wand” capable of instantly fixing years of structural issues in the economy.

While the war severely damaged Iran’s infrastructure, Selahvarzi emphasised that the roots of the country’s economic malaise were firmly planted well before the bombing began.

“War is the enemy of investment, production, trade and public welfare,” Selahvarzi told Al Jazeera. He warned against the analytical mistake of believing that a peace memorandum alone would revive the economy.

“Ending the military confrontation does not necessarily mean the beginning of economic prosperity,” he said, stressing that restoring stability to the business environment remains the country’s most urgent priority.

“What we have before us is a limited and fragile opportunity to correct course and rebuild the economy, and this opportunity could be lost quickly if not managed correctly.”

Iran’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs spokesperson, Esmaeil Baghaei, has announced that a memorandum of understanding with the United States has been finalised and signed electronically by both sides.

He added that the agreement has already gone into effect.

“The text of the Islamabad Memorandum of Understanding was finalised with the signatures of the presidents,” Baghaei told the news agency IRNA. “Now it is time to test the implementation of the agreement.”

Wednesday’s statement appears to confirm that the US and Iran have agreed to suspend military operations, paving the way for further negotiations.

Given that both sides signed the agreement electronically, Baghaei noted that there would be no signing ceremony on Friday in Geneva, Switzerland, as had previously been expected.

Negotiating teams, however, still plan to be in the Swiss city. A decision on a possible in-person meeting between them is expected in the coming hours, though for now such plans are paused, according to Baghaei.

While the office of US President Donald Trump has yet to issue a formal statement on the signing, Al Jazeera correspondent Mike Hanna explained that a White House spokesperson confirmed earlier in the day that it happened.

But Hanna warned that the memorandum is likely to face domestic backlash in the US, where Trump had been under right-wing pressure to take a hard line against Iran.

“There’s a great deal of dissatisfaction with the memorandum of understanding, as it has been outlined to the public at this particular point, even among some Republicans who have expressed the concern that Iran is being treated leniently,” Hanna said.

He also emphasised the administration’s position that the memorandum is not a full-fledged deal but rather a prelude to more negotiations.

“The administration is fighting hard to persuade the American public and American politicians that this is not a defeat for the United States,” Hanna said.

Since February 28, the US and Israel have been jointly engaged in a war against Iran, though a temporary ceasefire suspended much of the most intense fighting on April 8.

Trump has repeatedly said his goal in launching the war was to prevent Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon.

Since the memorandum was revealed, he has highlighted the document’s assurances that Iran will not seek a nuclear weapon, though Tehran has long denied any intention of doing so.

But according to a US account, the memo goes beyond the question of nuclear weapons. It sets up a 60-day timeline for a final deal to be struck, and it indicates that the US will rally “regional partners” to create a $300bn for Iran’s reconstruction.

US sanctions would also work towards lifting its sanctions against Iran, and the country would issue waivers for the export of Iranian fuel.

Iran has touted those terms as a victory. On Wednesday, chief negotiator Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf told Fars, an Iranian state news agency, that the US had failed to achieve its goals with Iran and pointed to the memo as proof.

“The agreement is a record of US failure,” Ghalibaf said. “People will see it and judge.”

He also explained that the Strait of Hormuz would not return to “pre-war conditions” after the 60-day period for negotiations stipulated in the agreement. He suggested that Iran will expect payments for use of the waterway.

“I emphasise again that the Strait of Hormuz will never return to the previous conditions,” Ghalibaf said.

“Iran has the right to sovereignty over the Strait of Hormuz, and of course, we will receive a fee for services.”

That position is likely to put pressure on the Trump administration, which had pledged that the strait, a key waterway for trade, would be “permanently toll-free”.

Since the start of the war, Iran has blocked the waterway, sending global prices for fuel, fertiliser and other goods soaring.

The US had responded with its own blockade of Iranian ports, though that effort is slated to end under the memorandum.

Both sides, however, have emphasised that the memorandum of understanding is not a final agreement on all issues of dispute. More negotiations are expected to resolve lasting impasses.

“It will only become a deal, as such, at the end of the 60-day negotiation period. At least, that’s the intention,” Hanna reported.

The US-Iran memorandum of understanding expected to be formally signed in Switzerland on Friday could allow for the establishment of a $300bn investment fund for Iran, as part of a broader settlement to end the war that triggered a global energy crisis and upended markets worldwide.

US Vice President JD Vance told CBS News on Monday that the incentives would be connected to Iran’s “performance” in adhering to the deal, which was digitally signed by both sides on Sunday.

The scale of the financial incentives grabbed the headlines due to US President Donald Trump’s longstanding criticism of a 2015 nuclear accord that he claimed delivered economic benefits to Tehran.

In a bid to manage perceptions around this politically sensitive issue, Trump took to his Truth Social platform to claim that “the story that the US is paying Iran 300 million Dollars is Fake News,” while Vance told CBS News that the money would not be a US payout in exchange for Iran’s enriched uranium.

“When people say that billions of dollars of assets will be released, that’s not true,” the vice president told the CBS Morning programme. “What is true is that Iran will have a much better and much more prosperous future if they meet the obligations they make in this agreement.”

What do we know about the $300bn investment fund?

Vance said the deal “fundamentally extends a hand to Iran and says, ‘Look, if you guys are willing to honour your obligations, if you’re willing to allow real inspections of your nuclear programme, then we will welcome you back into the world economy.’

“That’s the sort of thing they could have access to, funded by the Gulf Coast coalition, so long as they honour their end of the obligation,” Vance told CBS. He also claimed that while US money would not be injected, economic opportunities could arise once Iran repositions itself in the global economy.

The New York Times quoted sources saying the fund would not come from governments but be created for companies eager to invest in Iran.

Muhanad Seloom, a non-resident senior fellow at the Middle East Council on Global Affairs, said the setup was a no-lose solution for Washington. “If Iran reforms, the administration owns the peace; if it doesn’t, the US loses nothing and the Gulf carries the risk,” he told Al Jazeera.

What about the Iranian frozen assets?

Seloom said the idea of an investment fund was built precisely to escape the optics of releasing Iran’s frozen funds. While the exact amount of Iran’s frozen assets is unclear, official Iranian reports and experts have set the total amount at more than $100bn.

Iran’s economy has been crippled due to years of sanctions imposed on the country by the United States and other nations following the Islamic revolution in 1979, and then amplified over Iran’s nuclear and ballistic missiles programmes. These measures have restricted Tehran’s ability to access its own assets, such as revenues from oil sales, which have been frozen in foreign banks.

Tehran was granted sanctions relief in the wake of the landmark 2015 nuclear deal signed under President Barack Obama, but Trump tore it up in 2018 during his first term. The 2015 deal had put limits on Iran’s nuclear enrichment in exchange for sanctions relief.

Iran’s state-affiliated Mehr News agency reported on Sunday that the 14-point draft memorandum of understanding provided for the release of $24bn in frozen Iranian assets.

Pressed by CBS News on the possibility of releasing frozen funds, Vance said the $24bn figure “just doesn’t appear anywhere in any of the texts that we’ve talked about with the Iranians”.

“What we have said is that we’re willing to talk about unfreezing assets, but a much, much bigger deal is unsanctioning their economy – so long as they make the long-term commitments on the nuclear programme,” the vice president added.

For Iran, where the war inflicted an estimated $29bn damage and the population is struggling with the highest inflation rate since 1942, the investment fund may constitute a much-needed lifeline.

But the optics will not be as favourable, raising a “dignity problem”, Seloom said. “Tehran reads this as supervised, conditional money rather than sovereign relief,” the analyst told Al Jazeera.

Which other contentious issues will be discussed after signing the deal on Friday?

One of the US’s main declared objectives has been to assuage concerns surrounding Iran’s nuclear programme, including a stockpile of more than 440kg (970lbs) of enriched uranium.

The memorandum extends an existing ceasefire arrangement for another 60 days, during which the two sides are expected to hold further negotiations on issues including the disposal of the enriched uranium.

Vance said Tehran had agreed to surrender its stockpile, undergo regular inspections and refrain from producing or buying nuclear weapons, but the full text of the memorandum of understanding has yet to be disclosed.

The reopening of the Strait of Hormuz, which has been subject to competing blockades by the US and Iran, has also been a point of contention. Trump suggested an agreement to reopen the waterway had been reached when he announced a deal on Sunday with the words: “Let the oil flow!”

Speaking to CNBC, however, Vance acknowledged that not all sticking points surrounding the passageway had been resolved. “Well, our expectation is that the strait is gonna be opened in a toll-free way for the long term, and that’s the sort of thing that we’re gonna figure out in these technical negotiations,” he said.

Israel’s ongoing aggression on Lebanon is also expected to create friction, as Iran has insisted any ceasefire deal must include the allied nation. Israel has so far rejected any arrangement that would limit its ability to strike what it says are Hezbollah targets. Defence Minister Israel Katz on Friday said the military would continue operating in Lebanon regardless of any agreement with Tehran.

Mixed reactions to the agreement

Iranian ⁠⁠Foreign ⁠⁠Minister Abbas Araghchi said the memorandum of understanding would reap economic benefits for Iran but stressed that Tehran would not rely on those benefits for all of its needs.

“We have a history of broken promises, non-compliance, and the tearing up of agreements,” Araghchi said on Monday, according to Press TV. He said discussions about the lifting of US sanctions and Iran’s nuclear programme would be held during a 60-day period of negotiations following the official signature on Friday.

Iran’s new supreme leader, Mojtaba Khamenei, has yet to comment. Some Iranian observers objected to the timing of the announcement, which coincided with Trump’s birthday. Referring to the assassination of former Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei at the beginning of the US-Iran war, conservative journalist Parisa Nasr wrote on X: “Was giving a birthday gift to the killer of the martyred Leader also one of the unwritten conditions of the deal?”

Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian said Iran’s Supreme National Security Council had approved the deal so that “America’s genuine commitment to respecting the rights of the Iranian nation could be tested in practice.”

Speaking at the G7 summit in France on Tuesday, Trump described the deal with Iran as “fair”, “good”, and under which Iran “can’t have a nuclear weapon” or “they get blown up.”

Qatar’s Emir Sheikh Tamim bin Hamad Al Thani, who is also attending the summit, said the Iran-US agreement will result in positive outcomes for the region.

“This is a very important deal, there’s still a lot of work to be done, but with this momentum – if we continue like that, Mr President – I think we can achieve and do great things in the region,” Sheikh Tamim said.

US Democratic lawmakers welcomed a deal to halt the war with Iran but stressed that its terms must be made public. Senator Gregory Meeks said “any final agreement must be durable, enforceable, transparent” and more than “vague announcements or political spin”.

US Republican Senator Lindsey Graham on Sunday said he was “pleased” about the deal but also “somewhat concerned that Iran’s view of the agreement seems different than what the American negotiating team is claiming”.

Seloom, at the Middle East Council on Global Affairs, said the different narratives underlined that the two sides were “not really talking to each other”. “They’re talking past each other, to domestic audiences,” he said. “Each side has to sell this as a victory it cannot sell honestly.”

The preliminary deal to end US-Israel war on Iran has sent oil prices tumbling to a three-month low amid hopes that the Strait of Hormuz will reopen.

But it could be months before American consumers see major relief at the petrol pump.

The closure of the strategic chokepoint disrupted global energy markets for more than three months, cutting off a major shipping route through which roughly one-fifth of the world’s oil and liquefied natural gas normally passes.

On Sunday, US President Donald Trump said prices would “drop like a rock” once the strait reopens, a claim he has made multiple times in the past few weeks.

However, experts caution that a major decline in prices is unlikely to happen as quickly as Trump suggests.

While Asian markets rely more heavily on oil shipped through the Strait of Hormuz than North American markets, tighter supply and steady demand have pushed prices higher worldwide.

On Monday, petrol prices in the US remained above $4 per gallon (3.78 litres), averaging $4.06 nationwide, according to the American Automobile Association (AAA). This was a dip from a high in early May of $4.48 per gallon.

By comparison, prices stood at $2.98 per gallon on February 28, when the US and Israel first struck Iran, triggering a ripple effect across global energy markets.

Energy prices have risen sharply in the US in recent months, increasing 7.7 percent over the last two months alone, and are up 40 percent from a year ago, according to last week’s inflation report from the Labor Department’s Bureau of Labor Statistics,

However, prices are beginning to fall, a dip that began as Washington and Tehran entered negotiations.

“The potential deal that the US and Iran agreed to over the weekend certainly could pave the way for even lower prices… in the next two to three days by what we saw over the weekend,” Patrick De Haan, head of petroleum analysis at GasBuddy, which tracks petrol prices, told Al Jazeera.

But De Haan expects a plateau and says that consumers may not see gas prices at pre-war levels until 2027, even if the ceasefire holds.

“It may take many months, if not beyond a year, for global oil inventories to recover to pre-war levels,” De Haan said.

Amid strains on the supply chain, producers will also need time to ramp up output, while port bottlenecks and heightened demand during the busy summer travel season could delay any substantial relief for everyday consumers.

“There are some mitigating factors that are going to slow the decline in prices. There are a lot of organisations and companies that have to re-up their stockpiles [like the US’s strategic petroleum reserve] and fulfil contracts that have been on hold for the last few months,” John Deal, managing director of capital markets at the Post Oak Group investment bank, said.

Supply chain strains

Fixing kinks in the supply chain takes time.

Oil production slumped amid the war. More than 14 million barrels per day, or 14 percent of the world’s demand, has been shut, according to the International Energy Agency.

Deal said it would take time to get oil production back online.

“My sense is that there’s going to be sustained high demand through the summertime, and we probably won’t get back to pre-war levels [on petrol prices] until after the summer, maybe September or October,” Deal said.

Mark Jones, a professor of political science at Rice University, said that producers might be reluctant to bring full operations back online until they can see the ceasefire hold.

The agreement opening the blockade is for a 60-day negotiation period between the two countries.

“Many [producers] may be reluctant to restart production until they are convinced that the peace will hold, because the last thing they want to do is carry out the costly effort to restart production only to see the conflict revived and then have to shut it down once again,” Jones told Al Jazeera.

Getting production back online is also dependent on the impact individual producers have faced throughout the war.

Refineries that were shut as a precaution could reach as much as 95 percent capacity within 40-60 days, Vitol Bahrain’s head of research, Bader Nooruddin, told the Reuters news agency. Those damaged in the fighting could take much longer.

But bottlenecks at ports could be the biggest hurdle, according to Deal.

“There’s a lag time with shipping capacity. Shipping capacity is perhaps the most significant constraint,” Deal said.

This is because there are more than 500 ships still awaiting passage, according to shipping data from Kpler.

With the ships headed all over the world, it will take them weeks to reach their destinations, dock, and unload at the ports.

That also means a wave of empty ships is waiting in limbo for spots at ports to load cargo and ramp back up to normal operations.

Major shipping giants are in a holding pattern.

Norway’s Wallenius Wilhelmsen and Denmark’s Maersk both told Reuters that they have not changed their Middle East operations in the wake of the announcement.

During the war, there was limited passage through the Strait of Hormuz, with an average of 10 ships a day passing through, compared with 135 that normally transit the waterway, according to an analysis by Bloomberg.

“Tankers take months to reach their final destination and then come back again. So the ability to replenish the stocks is going to take until, I think, the early fall, just from a shipping perspective, to get back to the status quo that was in place before the conflict started,” Jones said, referring to the preferred term for the months of September through November in North America.

At the same time, US strategic reserves are running low, at their lowest levels since 1983. Reserves have tumbled by 18 percent since the war began.

“Demand might keep prices high through the summer as strategic reserves get refilled,” Deal added.

Jet fuel demand will also put pressure on consumers amid the normally busy JuneAugust travel season in the US.

“The war has really affected airlines and their ability to schedule and anticipate how the summer months are going to go,” Deal added.

In April, United Airlines CEO Scott Kirby said that airfares for the carrier may have to jump as much as 20 percent on higher fuel prices.

Grocery woes

The increase in prices is also hitting food budgets.

The most recent consumer price index report showed US inflation ticked up by 4.2 percent compared with this time last year. While inflationary pressures were mostly driven by fuel prices, the impact has still been felt at the grocery store.

Almost half of the world’s urea, which is used in fertiliser, is produced in the Gulf region and passes through the Strait of Hormuz. For American farmers, that means access to fertilisers for the next crop season is more expensive.

Tomato prices, already driven up by Trump’s tariffs on Mexico, have surged 40 percent in the last year amid rising transportation costs.

Lettuce prices rose by more than 16 percent in May, and the price of ground beef increased by about 12 percent compared with this time last year.

Jones warned that food prices may not go down.

“Many retailers, wholesalers, and producers will keep them where they are or only reduce them if forced to from a sales perspective. Unlike petrol, which tends to ebb and flow with the price of oil, prices for many other goods that have been adversely affected by all of this are much less likely to return to where they were prior to the start of the conflict,” Jones said.

“For groceries, for manufacturing goods, for anything that has gone up during the conflict, the price that is there now often becomes the new baseline from which prices move in the future.”

This can be compared with the COVID-19 pandemic period. When the pandemic stalled supply chains, producers increased prices. A 2024 investigation by the Federal Trade Commission found that retail grocers kept prices elevated after supply chain constraints brought on by the pandemic had eased.

“Some in the grocery retail industry seem to have used rising costs as an opportunity to further raise prices to increase their profits,” the report said.

Israeli journalist Gideon Levy says the US-Iran announcement represents a personal defeat for Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his ambitions against Iran and Lebanon. His relationship with US President Donald Trump could also be at risk if Israel jeopardises the deal.

The US and Iran say they have reached a deal to end fighting on all fronts and open the Strait of Hormuz. Al Jazeera’s Osama Bin Javaid explains how both sides are claiming victory, even as tough negotiations over the details still lie ahead.

The US-Iran ceasefire announcement has raised hopes in Lebanon, after Pakistani mediators claimed it included an end to Israel’s war on the country. But as Al Jazeera’s Heidi Pett explains, we’ve been here before.

Al Jazeera’s Heidi Pett reports from the site of an Israeli attack on a residential building in southern Beirut, which Israel calls a Hezbollah command centre. The strike came hours before President Trump said a US-Iran deal was meant to be signed.

United States President Donald Trump has said an initial agreement to end the US-Israeli war with Iran is “scheduled to get signed tomorrow”.

But that announcement, made on Trump’s Truth Social account on Saturday, contradicts an earlier statement by Iranian Ministry of Foreign Affairs spokesman Esmaeil Baghaei.

In remarks carried by Iran’s IRNA news agency, Baghaei said a memorandum of understanding would not be signed on Sunday and that negotiators are not planning to travel immediately to Geneva, Switzerland, in preparation for such an event.

According to Baghaei, a signing could happen “in the coming days”.

Hours later, Trump wrote, “The Deal is scheduled to get signed tomorrow, and immediately after it is signed, the Hormuz Strait is OPEN TO ALL.” Sunday marks Trump’s 80th birthday.

In recent days, Iran and the US have repeatedly contradicted each other when describing the details of the anticipated agreement, even as both sides have broadly signalled that a deal was closer than ever before.

Still, no terms have been officially released, with US and Iranian officials on Friday stressing that the agreement had not been finalised.

Beyond opening the Strait of Hormuz, Trump said in Saturday’s post that the agreement would be a “A WALL TO NO NUCLEAR WEAPON!” and that “no money would exchange hands”.

Trump also maintained that “at the appropriate time, when all is calm, we will go in and get the Nuclear Dust”, referring to Iran’s stockpile of enriched uranium.

But speaking on Iran’s Press TV on Friday, Iranian ⁠⁠Foreign ⁠⁠Minister Abbas Araghchi said the initial memorandum of understanding would only be a launch point for negotiations about the future of Iran’s nuclear programme.

He added that the signing would result in an immediate pause in fighting, but that Iran and Oman would continue to administer the Strait of Hormuz.

The issue of lifting foreign sanctions against Iran and unfreezing the country’s assets would be discussed following the signing of the memorandum of understanding, Araghchi said.

From threats to diplomacy

The latest flurry of diplomacy came after the US and Iran traded strikes for two days this week, threatening to end a pause in fighting that has persisted since April 8.

The US and Israel launched the war on Iran on February 28, amid ongoing indirect talks on the future of Iran’s nuclear programme.

The US and Israel had also launched a 12-day war on Iran in 2025, during another round of nuclear talks.

Iranian officials have said that deep distrust towards the US has slowed the progress towards creating a lasting agreement to bring the current war to an end.

Trump, meanwhile, has repeatedly pledged to reach a deal that would surpass the 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), struck under his Democratic rival, former President Barack Obama.

That agreement, from which Trump unilaterally withdrew in 2018, saw Tehran agree to limit its nuclear programme and allow for international inspections in exchange for sanctions relief.

For years, Iran has maintained that it is building a nuclear programme for civilian use only and is not seeking a nuclear weapon.

In his post on Truth Social, Trump again pledged that any deal reached would be more stringent than the JCPOA.

“Our relationship with Iran is a much different and better one than previous Administrations have had,” he said.

“Hopefully, this process will all work out quickly, easily, and smoothly,” he added.

“If it doesn’t, we have the ultimate alternative, hopefully never to be used again!” he wrote, without elaborating on what his threat meant.