The United States and Iran signaled on Friday that a landmark agreement to end their devastating conflict was imminent, yet the path to peace was immediately complicated by a fresh spate of military action near the strategic Strait of Hormuz. A senior US administration official confirmed that both sides have agreed on a text and that Washington expects to sign an initial memorandum of understanding in the coming days.
Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi struck a triumphant tone on state television, declaring, “Iran is the winner of the war with the US.” He cautioned that while the tentative deal demonstrated Iran’s strengthened position, last-minute changes were still possible.
Drones Downed as Tensions Simmer
The optimistic diplomatic signals were quickly tested. Just hours after Araghchi’s address, US forces shot down multiple Iranian one-way attack drones that were heading toward the Strait of Hormuz, a source familiar with the matter told Reuters. The source, speaking on condition of anonymity, said the drones posed a direct threat to commercial traffic. US Central Command later confirmed the defensive action and asserted that the critical waterway remained open for transit.
Contradictory reports emerged from Iranian news agencies, which described explosions near the strait in Sirik port and on Qeshm island. Local officials and residents attributed the blasts to warning shots fired by Iranian at vessels attempting to navigate the area without authorization from the Revolutionary Guards’ navy.
The Terms of a Tentative Peace
The core of the proposed deal focuses on immediate, reciprocal actions. According to sources on all sides of the negotiations, the memorandum calls for Iran to reopen the Strait of Hormuz in exchange for the US lifting its naval blockade on Iranian ports. The closure of the strait, which before the war handled one-fifth of the world’s oil and gas supply, was a dramatic escalation by Tehran following US and Israeli strikes in February.
Negotiations over Iran’s nuclear program—the stated rationale for President Donald Trump’s initiation of the conflict—are slated to begin only after the initial deal is signed. A US administration official, who requested anonymity, asserted that the agreement met Trump’s core objectives and placed negotiations “in a very, very good place.” The official claimed the deal would ultimately lead to the dismantling of Iran’s nuclear program, with its stockpile of highly enriched uranium destroyed and removed under a strict, long-term inspection regime.
However, Araghchi presented a starkly different view. He told state television that Iran had not agreed to dismantle its nuclear program and instead preferred to retain its uranium stockpile in a diluted form. “For Tehran, the only preferred solution for its highly enriched uranium stockpile is down-blending the material,” he said.
A Deal That Favors Tehran?
Accounts of the draft proposal from Western, Pakistani, and Iranian sources painted a picture of terms that could heavily favor Iran, drawing immediate criticism from President Trump, who dismissed the reports as inaccurate. The broad outlines suggest Tehran could secure much of what it has sought. In return for opening the strait, the US would begin releasing billions of dollars in frozen Iranian assets and waive sanctions on its oil exports.
Further details from multiple sources indicate the proposals include discussions on possible war reparations for Tehran and the dropping of longstanding US demands for limits on Iran’s missile program. The US official fiercely disputed this account, stating, “None of their money released until they perform. Strait of Hormuz will be open. No Iran funding of terrorist groups. This is a performance-based deal.”
Foreign Minister Araghchi reinforced Iran’s position of strength, asserting that Iran, along with Oman, would retain control over traffic through the strait. “Our sword will always hang over the Strait of Hormuz,” he declared.
Israel Rejects Agreement, Vows Freedom of Action
Conspicuously absent from the negotiations, Israel has made its opposition clear. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu stated bluntly that his country would not be a party to the agreement. Tensions have flared between Netanyahu and Trump in recent weeks over US pressure on Israel to curb its military operations in Lebanon to facilitate a deal with Tehran.
Araghchi suggested the agreement would end the war in Lebanon, implying an Israeli withdrawal from occupied areas. This was immediately rejected by Israel’s defense minister, who said no withdrawal would occur. A senior Israeli official added that Israel expects to retain its complete freedom to act against any threats.
A Western source indicated the deal could be signed as soon as Sunday by US Vice President JD Vance and Iran’s parliament speaker, Mohammad Baqer Qalibaf, with Geneva seen as the most likely venue. The US official confirmed that Europe had been discussed but added that no final decision on location had been made. Araghchi stated the agreement would be signed remotely before its official announcement.
