WASHINGTON – The United States and Iran have electronically signed a framework agreement to end their current state of war, with a formal signing ceremony scheduled for Friday in Switzerland.
The agreement aims to resolve critical military and nuclear tensions between the two nations, though conflicting reports from Washington and Tehran suggest significant gaps in the interpretation of the deal’s terms.
A senior US official confirmed that the details of the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) will be released to the public within 24 to 48 hours. Vice-President JD Vance is scheduled to attend the formal ceremony in Switzerland to finalize the diplomatic process.
Maritime Access and the Strait of Hormuz
A primary component of the framework involves the restoration of maritime traffic and the cessation of naval hostilities in and around the Strait of Hormuz, one of the world’s most heavily transited energy corridors. Under international law, including the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), the passage is treated as an international strait, but Iran has long asserted expansive claims over adjacent waters.
President Trump stated that the agreement includes:
- The reopening of the Strait of Hormuz to commercial and energy shipping
- The termination of the US naval blockade on Iranian ports
US officials frame these steps as a phased de-escalation of maritime confrontation, to be verified by on-the-water monitoring and coordination with allied navies in the region.
While the blockade will end, the legal status of the Strait of Hormuz remains a point of contention. Iran has asserted that it “won” the war and is seeking formal recognition of its sovereignty over all or part of the waterway, a critical transit point for global oil supplies. US diplomats, by contrast, have signaled that any language in the final text must preserve established rights of transit passage for international shipping.
Conflicting Terms on Sanctions
Official statements regarding economic penalties differ sharply between the two governments, underscoring how politically sensitive sanctions relief remains in both capitals.
President Trump stated that the deal does not include immediate sanction relief, adding, “if they do what they’re supposed to do, that starts taking effect,” a formulation that suggests any easing would be contingent on verified Iranian compliance with security and nuclear obligations.
Conversely, Iranian state media has reported that the framework agreement does include the easing of US sanctions on Iran, portraying the document domestically as an economic breakthrough that would unlock trade, banking channels and energy exports.
US officials have not clarified whether potential relief would come through executive waivers, changes to Treasury Department designations, or a broader legislative review under mechanisms such as the Iran Nuclear Agreement Review Act, leaving open how quickly any shifts in sanctions policy could be implemented.
Disputed Status of Lebanon
The scope of the agreement regarding the conflict in Lebanon remains unresolved, with US and Iranian officials providing contradictory accounts on whether the framework extends beyond bilateral issues to encompass regional fronts.
A senior US official stated that the withdrawal of Israeli forces from Lebanon is not included in the deal, characterizing the framework as narrowly focused on US-Iran hostilities and nuclear constraints rather than a comprehensive regional settlement. This position was supported by Israel’s defence minister, who stated that Israeli forces intend to remain in Lebanon on the basis of their own security assessments.
However, a spokesperson for Iran’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs described the end of the conflict in Lebanon as a “pivotal part” of the framework agreement. Iran has called for a “complete halt” to all actions in the region, language that Tehran is presenting as evidence that it secured broader concessions on regional de-escalation.
Diplomats involved in the talks say the final wording on Lebanon will be closely watched by regional governments and international mediators, given its potential implications for existing ceasefire understandings and security arrangements.
Nuclear Program Restrictions
The framework establishes new limits on Iran’s nuclear capabilities, focusing on the prevention of weapons development and the codification of what both sides describe as “verifiable guarantees.” It is expected to interact with, and in some areas go beyond, earlier non-proliferation commitments under the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, to which Iran is already a party.
According to Iranian state media, Tehran is committing not to produce nuclear weapons. The deal initiates a 60-day window during which the US and Iran must reach an agreement on the protocols for the destruction and removal of nuclear material, as well as inspection and verification procedures likely to involve international monitors.
Specifics regarding the following remain undisclosed:
- Limits on uranium enrichment levels and the number and type of centrifuges permitted
- The disposition of Iran’s existing stockpile of highly enriched uranium and potential timelines for its dilution, export or destruction
The full text of the MOU is expected to be published within the next 48 hours, providing the first authoritative account of the obligations, timelines and enforcement mechanisms that will determine whether this framework becomes a durable shift in US-Iran relations or a fragile pause in a decades-long confrontation.
Keep reading
