If it feels as though Washington and Tehran have been on the verge of a deal before, it’s because they have. At least 38 times during the months of negotiations to end the war in Iran, President Trump has suggested that an agreement was within reach, only for new disputes, military escalations, or competing narratives to push the finish line further away.
Diplomacy has unfolded against a backdrop of strikes and counterstrikes, threats of wider conflict, and cease-fires that Trump has defined as “shooting in a more moderate manner.” The president has made a stream of public claims that were subsequently contradicted by events, sometimes only hours later. Even today, after senior administration officials said that negotiators have largely settled the text of a memorandum of understanding, the agreement remains unsigned.
The latest proposed deal would combine nuclear restrictions, economic incentives, and a broader regional de-escalation effort. It would specifically address the reopening of the Strait of Hormuz; Iran would end its disruption of shipping traffic and, in exchange, eventually receive access to frozen assets and phased sanctions-relief on its oil exports. It would also start the clock on negotiations over the fate of Iran’s nuclear material, and establish a framework under which Iran could receive financial incentives if it fulfills its obligations. Negotiators have made substantial progress in recent weeks and have drafted language that both sides appear prepared to accept, although no signing date or location has been finalized. “We’re not quite at the finish line yet, but we are very close,” a senior Trump-administration official told reporters on the condition of anonymity in a call this afternoon. Iran’s foreign minister, Abbas Araghchi, confirmed on X that the two sides are close to an agreement, and his ministry said that most issues have been resolved. Even a temporary deal might allow Trump to declare the war effectively over. It would also enable the Iranian regime to demonstrate that it remains standing, despite weeks of pounding from U.S. and Israeli air strikes.
The nuclear provisions remain at the center of the negotiations. The idea, officials told us, is that Iran would make an indefinite commitment to not developing or acquiring a nuclear weapon (which they had done before the war), and it would take steps toward dismantling its nuclear program, including the on-site destruction and removal of the enriched uranium needed to fabricate a weapon. But administration officials acknowledge that commitments alone will not be enough, and consistent compliance is far from guaranteed.
“I don’t think the Iranians trust us, and I don’t think the United States trusts the Iranians,” the senior administration official said. “We’re trying to set up a process whereby we can build that trust, bring this thing to a close, accomplish something meaningful for both Iran and the United States of America. And that’s how we set up this negotiation. It’s’ not based around trust, not based around empty promises, but based around verifiable steps that are good for the United States and good for Iran.”
[Read: Trump dreads an Iran deal worse than Obama’s]
Officials from nations that are on the periphery of the conflict told us that they are deeply skeptical Iran would adhere to such an agreement. Some worry that the terms were rushed, in part because Trump has made clear he wants to see an end to a conflict that was intended to last only six weeks and is now in its fourth month. The war has rattled global markets and sent gas prices in the U.S. soaring while dividing Trump’s own MAGA coalition. “The Iranians are positioning to milk it,” one Persian Gulf official told us.
Administration officials argue that recent developments have strengthened Washington’s negotiating position, and assert that Iran’s ability to exert control over the Strait of Hormuz has weakened, which has allowed more oil to move through the waterway in recent weeks than during the early stages of the conflict. One official also argued that Iran’s conventional military capabilities and its ability to project power throughout the region have been significantly degraded, creating incentives for Tehran to pursue economic relief through diplomacy. At the same time, officials acknowledge deep mistrust on both sides and caution that enforcement questions remain crucial. Under the proposed framework, Iran would receive economic benefits only when it meets specific milestones, and pressure would remain in place if those commitments are not fulfilled. But experts are skeptical that the deal will play out in a manner that the administration might hope.
“If the Iranians have their way, and I suspect they will, it will amount to less than meets the eye,” Jon Alterman, a Middle East expert at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, told us. Iran’s “view is that they’ve won. The region’s biggest power and the world’s biggest power came together to take them on, and they’re still standing.” Iran’s adversaries, meanwhile, are “at each other’s throats and are looking at daunting fall election scenarios. The Iranians see lots of silver linings, and cause for patience,” Alterman added.
The administration views the agreement as part of a broader regional peace effort involving Iran, Israel, Lebanon, and Arab Gulf States. The Trump administration, the senior official said, is confident that Israel and Gulf partners can support the framework, but the official stressed that no country would be expected to surrender its right to self-defense.
A key element of the agreement is the system of inspections and checks that is designed to ensure compliance before Iran receives economic benefits. Administration officials said that negotiators spent weeks refining language governing the destruction and disposal of enriched material, an issue that received direct attention from Trump and became one of the most heavily negotiated sections of the text. In the past three months, the U.S., Iran, Israel, and the broader Persian Gulf region have all been reshaped by the war. But none of the combatants can claim to be unbruised by a conflict that has cost billions of dollars, driven up oil prices, and restricted supplies of key commodities, such as fertilizer.
[Read: How Iran killed its economy]
At least four times over the past two months, U.S. forces destroyed Iranian missile launchers, drones, and other targets in what it called “self defense strikes,” a description that underscores how much military capability Iran still has in place. Iran has launched multiple strikes on American partners in the Gulf. This month alone, Iran targeted a commercial airport and a U.S. installation inside Kuwait. Previous efforts by intermediaries to bring the two sides together failed, and Trump earlier this week threatened to take control of Kharg Island, though many have dismissed his words as bluster. The draft agreement is a signal that neither Washington nor Tehran wants a return to an air-and-missile campaign. Like most contemporary wars, this one may ultimately end not with a clear victor but with a deal that leaves all parties involved exhausted and with less than what they might have hoped.