╌>

what are the terms of the latest us iran peace deal ?

John Russell » Groups » NEWSMucks » Discussions » what are the terms of the latest us iran peace deal ?
  
Via:  John Russell  •  5 months ago  •  9 comments


what are the terms of the latest us iran peace deal ?
 

Leave a comment to auto-join group NEWSMucks

NEWSMucks


S E E D E D   C O N T E N T








what are the terms of the latest us iran peace deal











Short answer: There is no fully finalized, publicly confirmed U.S.–Iran peace deal as of June 12, 2026, but multiple credible reports outline the tentative terms under negotiation. All details remain subject to final approval and both sides dispute leaked versions. You should confirm developments with trusted news sources, as the situation is fluid.


🇺🇸🇮🇷 What the latest proposed U.S.–Iran deal appears to include


(Based strictly on sourced reporting; Iran and the U.S. both deny that a final agreement exists.)

1. Reopening the Strait of Hormuz

  • Iran would reopen the Strait of Hormuz and restore commercial shipping to pre‑war conditions within ~30 days.

  • Vessel traffic would be “unrestricted” — no tolls, no harassment, and Iran must remove all mines.

  • In exchange, the U.S. would lift its naval blockade on Iranian ports proportionally as shipping resumes.

2. Nuclear restrictions

  • Iran would destroy or dispose of its enriched uranium stockpile, under a mechanism still being negotiated.

  • Iran would affirm that it will not develop nuclear weapons.

  • U.S. officials say the deal would restrict Iran’s ability to build a nuclear weapon.

3. Ceasefire and end-of-war framework

  • A 60‑day ceasefire extension is part of the draft, with negotiations toward a permanent end to the war.

  • A broader MoU would open a 30‑day negotiation window for a long‑term peace framework.

4. Sanctions and economic measures

  • The U.S. would waive some sanctions, allowing Iran to sell oil more freely.

  • Iranian state media claimed the U.S. would release frozen funds and lift oil sanctions, but the White House denies this.

5. Military de-escalation

  • Draft terms reportedly include ending all military operations on every front, including Lebanon — though U.S. officials dispute whether this is actually in the agreed text.


⚠️ What the two sides disagree about

  • Trump says leaked Iranian “deal terms” are fake and “bear no relation to the truth.”

  • Iran says the MoU is “not yet finalized” and warns media not to speculate.

  • Iran denies U.S. claims that an agreement is imminent.


🧭 Bottom line


A tentative framework exists, but no final peace deal has been signed. The most consistent elements across sources are:

  • Reopening Hormuz

  • Lifting the U.S. blockade

  • Limits on enriched uranium

  • A 60‑day ceasefire extension

  • Sanctions relief tied to compliance

But both governments dispute leaked details, and negotiations remain unfinished.

If you want, I can also break down the sticking points, what each side wants, or how close the deal actually is.




Tags

jrGroupDiscuss - desc
[]
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
1  seeder  JohnRussell    5 months ago

I've heard Iran will get north of 300 billion dollars in unfrozen assets. 

They will not sign a deal that doesnt give them a lot of money. 

Of course Trump will deny that it happened. 

 
 
 
devangelical
Professor Principal
1.1  devangelical  replied to  JohnRussell @1    5 months ago

I read yesterday that the military claims of $29 billion dollars spent on the war so far, is only an estimate of the aircraft lost, mostly on the ground ...

 
 
 
MrFrost
Professor Guide
1.2  MrFrost  replied to  JohnRussell @1    5 months ago
I've heard Iran will get north of 300 billion dollars in unfrozen assets. 

And how much did Obama send them that the Nutters cried about for YEARS? Naw, I am sure they will cry about trump sending them 10x the amount. /s

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
2  TᵢG    5 months ago

For comparison, here is a ChatGPT summary of the JCPOA terms:

The Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action , or JCPOA , reached in 2015:   It involved Iran, the United States, Britain, France, Germany, Russia, China, and the European Union, and was endorsed by the UN Security Council. ( 2009-2017.state.gov )

What Iran agreed to

  • Limit uranium enrichment to 3.67% for 15 years , far below weapons-grade levels.

  • Reduce its enriched-uranium stockpile by roughly 98% , from about 10,000 kilograms to no more than 300 kilograms for 15 years.

  • Reduce and restrict its centrifuges. Iran could operate only 5,060 older IR-1 centrifuges at Natanz for 10 years, while thousands of others were dismantled and stored under monitoring.

  • Stop enriching uranium at Fordow for 15 years. The underground facility was to be converted primarily into a research center.

  • Redesign the Arak heavy-water reactor so it could not produce significant quantities of weapons-grade plutonium.

  • Ship spent reactor fuel out of Iran and refrain from reprocessing it.

  • Accept extensive IAEA monitoring and inspections , including surveillance of enrichment facilities, uranium mines, mills, centrifuge production, and other parts of the nuclear supply chain. Some monitoring provisions lasted 20 or 25 years, while Iran’s basic obligation not to develop nuclear weapons remained permanent. ( whitehouse.gov )

The goal was to extend the estimated time Iran would need to produce enough weapons-grade material for one bomb, known as its breakout time , from approximately two or three months to at least one year for roughly a decade. ( whitehouse.gov )

What Iran received

Once the IAEA verified that Iran had carried out its initial nuclear commitments:

  • UN, European, and American nuclear-related sanctions were lifted, suspended, or waived .

  • Iran regained greater access to international oil sales, banking, trade, and previously restricted overseas assets.

  • Sanctions connected to terrorism, human-rights abuses, and certain missile activities generally remained in place because the agreement concerned the nuclear program, not every aspect of Iranian conduct. ( whitehouse.gov )

Enforcement

The agreement contained a dispute-resolution process and a “snapback” mechanism permitting UN sanctions to be restored if Iran significantly violated the agreement. The arrangement was designed so another Security Council member could not simply veto the restoration of sanctions. ( 2009-2017.state.gov )

The principal criticisms

Critics argued that:

  • Some of the most important restrictions expired after 10 or 15 years.

  • Iran was still permitted to maintain a limited uranium-enrichment program.

  • Sanctions relief gave Iran additional economic resources.

  • The deal did not comprehensively address ballistic missiles, support for militant organizations, human-rights abuses, or Iran’s regional military activity.

Supporters responded that the agreement was deliberately a nuclear-arms-control agreement , not a comprehensive peace settlement, and that restricting and inspecting Iran’s nuclear infrastructure was preferable to leaving it unconstrained. ( whitehouse.gov )

What Trump did

Trump withdrew the United States from the JCPOA on May 8, 2018 , and subsequently restored extensive American sanctions. He did not literally terminate the entire international agreement, because the other participants initially remained in it, but American sanctions severely undermined its economic bargain. ( State Department )

At the time of the American withdrawal, the IAEA stated that Iran was implementing its nuclear-related commitments and described the JCPOA’s inspection system as the world’s most robust nuclear-verification regime. ( IAEA )

In essence, the bargain was: Iran substantially reduced, restricted, and opened its nuclear program to inspection in exchange for relief from nuclear-related sanctions. It did not require the United States to trust Iran; it attempted to control the nuclear risk through measurable limits and verification.

If Trump had not been (stupidly) elected, this is the 'deal' that would be in place without losing blood, treasure, and international credibility.

 
 
 
Nerm_L
Professor Expert
3  Nerm_L    5 months ago

Everyone keeps glossing over the fact that this is a memorandum and not an agreement.  This is not a 'deal'.  Trump is so desperate to find an off ramp that nothing coming out of the White House can be taken at face value.  The National Enquirer is a more reliable source of factual news than the Trump administration.  

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
3.1  TᵢG  replied to  Nerm_L @3    5 months ago

True.   We are stuck speculating because nothing from this administration can be trusted.   In fact, chances are best that what Trump states is mostly false.

 
 
 
MrFrost
Professor Guide
4  MrFrost    5 months ago

We'll know more in 2 weeks. 

 
 
 
Hallux
Professor Principal
4.1  Hallux  replied to  MrFrost @4    5 months ago

I doubt it, the pigs have yet to decide on what shade of lipstick to wear and to oink about.

 
 
 
devangelical
Professor Principal
4.2  devangelical  replied to  MrFrost @4    5 months ago

anytime now, within the next 2 weeks ...

trump's deal is already much worse than the one he tore up, and it only cost taxpayers $100+ billion more ...

time to fake another assassination attempt ...

 
 
You must be logged in to post a comment

Who is online



147 visitors