Kenneth Glad
The agreement has created a narrow opening for diplomacy after months of danger. Its real test will come as negotiators confront the issues left unresolved.
The United States and Iran have signed an initial agreement intended to halt the conflict and begin 60 days of negotiations toward a final settlement, according to the BBC.
CNN reported that President Donald Trump signed the document in France after his G7 trip before it was sent to Tehran and signed by Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian. The signing took place during Trump’s visit with French President Emmanuel Macron at the Palace of Versailles.
The memorandum includes early steps on shipping through the Strait of Hormuz, Iranian oil exports, sanctions relief, frozen assets and a proposed reconstruction fund. It also calls for military operations to stop on all fronts, including Lebanon.
The first test is compliance
Vice President JD Vance said at a White House briefing covered by CNN that Iran had not fired on ships in the Strait of Hormuz for a second night.
“On the military side, the Iranians, for the second night in a row, did not shoot at any ships in the Strait of Hormuz. So far, they are honoring their end of the commitment,” Vance said.
He also said the United States had allowed more ships through its naval blockade.
“On the blockade, CENTCOM’s allowed north of a dozen ships to go through our naval blockade, and so we’re also honoring our end of the early part of the agreement,” Vance said.
Vance was cautious about what comes next, however;
“They certainly recognize that the United States has great leverage. Will that ultimately lead to a change in behavior? I don’t know.”
According to TV 2, Middle East correspondent Benjamin Kürstein questioned how firm the ceasefire language can be while Trump continues to warn that the US could resume bombing.
He also pointed to the unresolved questions in Lebanon, including what happens to Israeli soldiers in southern Lebanon and how Israel would respond if Hezbollah fires across the border again.
Nuclear questions are delayed
The nuclear issue remains the core unresolved dispute.
According to BBC, the new memorandum is not as detailed as the 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action. That earlier agreement capped Iran’s uranium stockpile at 300 kilograms, limited enrichment to 3.67 percent and allowed International Atomic Energy Agency inspections.
The new document says Iran reaffirms that it will not develop nuclear weapons, but it does not set technical limits. It says the two sides will discuss enrichment and the future of existing enriched material.
BBC furthermore reported that US officials have said Iran’s enriched stockpile could be destroyed, but the memorandum itself does not explicitly require that.
That leaves major issues for the next phase: enrichment levels, inspections, stockpile disposal and enforcement.
Kürstein’s analysis for TV 2 described this part of the agreement as the core issue for Washington, but said it is worded so loosely that it is difficult to know what has actually been settled.
He noted that Iran has long said it does not want nuclear weapons, while still struggling to explain why it enriched uranium far beyond what is needed for a civilian program.
In his assessment, the United States does not appear to have achieved more on the nuclear file than it did under the Obama-era deal in 2015. The difference is that the toughest questions have been pushed into the next round.
Oil relief comes quickly
The economic terms move faster than the nuclear provisions.
The BBC’s analysis said the memorandum allows immediate waivers for Iranian crude oil exports, petroleum products, banking, insurance, transportation and related services.
The agreement also refers to ending sanctions on an agreed schedule. For Tehran, that could mean faster access to revenue after years of economic pressure.
Kürstein calls the oil waiver a concrete win for Iran. His assessment is that Tehran is now in a stronger position than it was when the war began, because its most important source of income can restart before the hardest political concessions are resolved.
The memorandum also includes a proposed reconstruction and development plan worth at least $300 billion. CNN reported that JD Vance previously linked the fund to Gulf countries, but no Gulf government has publicly committed to financing it.
Saudi Foreign Minister Prince Faisal bin Farhan said he had “no details” about the fund, according to CNN, and pointed to a “significant loss of trust” after Iranian attacks on Gulf states during the war.
Kürstein describes the reconstruction money as a promise that remains uncertain for Iran, because the funds would only arrive if a final agreement is reached. He also notes that Trump has made clear the money is not expected to come from the United States.
Frozen assets raise the stakes
The agreement also addresses Iranian funds that have been frozen or blocked abroad.
According to TV 2, the memorandum says the United States will move, as negotiations progress, to release Iran’s frozen or restricted funds and assets and make them available for use.
Kürstein described that provision as another victory for Tehran. His analysis said billions of Iranian dollars have been locked in accounts around the world for years, and Iran now stands to regain access while initially committing mainly to keeping the Strait of Hormuz open and toll-free for 60 days.
That sequencing is politically important. Iran receives early economic relief, while Washington’s main security goals depend on later talks.
The agreement also says both sides will maintain the status quo until a final settlement is reached. Iran will not alter its nuclear posture, while the United States will not impose new sanctions or increase its troop presence in the region.
For Kürstein, that means little changes on the hardest files while negotiations continue.
Hormuz remains a pressure point
The Strait of Hormuz is central because of its importance to global energy flows.
The memorandum says Washington will fully end its naval blockade of Iran within 30 days. Iran is expected to use its best efforts to ensure safe commercial passage through the strait for 60 days.
CNN reported that several vessels had already crossed after the agreement took effect.
Longer-term control of the waterway remains unsettled. BBC says that Iran has discussed future administration of shipping services in the strait, including possible fees.
Kürstein’s analysis for TV 2 identified this as a likely source of future conflict. Iran has signaled that it may want payment for maritime services later, while the United States has rejected the idea of charges. For now, shipping may resume, but the question of what happens after 60 days is still open.
Regional politics could disrupt the deal
The agreement is not only a US-Iran matter.
Israel, Gulf states and armed groups across the region could shape whether the memorandum holds. The Lebanon provision is already under strain.
CNN writes that Israel has continued strikes against Hezbollah targets and has said it will not withdraw from Lebanon.
Trump has criticized Israel’s actions against Hezbollah, saying: “They could do better.”
The political risks are high for all sides. Trump needs to show that the agreement produces security gains, not just temporary de-escalation. Iran must balance economic relief with domestic claims of strength. Gulf states may hesitate to fund reconstruction without stronger guarantees. Israel is likely to resist any final deal it sees as too favorable to Tehran.
Kürstein notes that the document does not appear to secure what Washington originally said it wanted from the war. The unresolved areas include Iran’s nuclear program, its missile capabilities and its support for allied groups such as Hezbollah in Lebanon and the Houthis in Yemen.
The final agreement, if reached, is supposed to be approved through a binding United Nations Security Council resolution. Kürstein said such an outcome would be transformative for the Middle East and the wider world, but added that the road there remains long and that it is easier to see why the process could fail than why it would succeed.
The next 60 days will decide whether the memorandum becomes a real settlement or a short pause. The unanswered questions are specific and difficult:
- What will happen to Iran’s enriched uranium?
- How will sanctions relief be enforced?
- Who will pay for reconstruction?
- What rules will govern the Strait of Hormuz?
- Will Iran regain access to frozen assets?
- Can the fighting in Lebanon actually stop?
Sources: CNN, BBC Verify, TV 2
