The world is closely watching what happens next after Pakistan’s Prime Minister announced on Friday that Washington and Tehran had reached the final version of a memorandum of understanding. The development is expected to fuel optimism that the understandings could pave the way for wider regional de-escalation.
According to Reuters, citing a source familiar with the matter, an agreement between the United States and Iran could be signed as early as Sunday by US Vice President JD Vance and Iranian Parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, with Geneva emerging as the most likely venue for the meeting.
Araghchi Declares Iran Victorious
A senior US official estimated there was an 80 to 85 per cent chance of an agreement being signed in the coming days, although he stressed the likelihood was “not 100 per cent”. Meanwhile, Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi declared that “Iran is the victor in the war with the United States”.
Despite President Donald Trump’s announcement that he had reached a “wonderful settlement” with Iran, describing it as a “very strong” and “very detailed” memorandum of understanding, the reality appears far more complicated than the public statements suggest.
According to CNN, serious questions remain about the nature of the arrangement and whether its provisions can succeed in practice.
In its analysis, the network noted that until Thursday the world appeared caught between two possibilities: an imminent escalation or Trump’s call for peace. Only hours after threatening military action and warning of an invasion of Khark Island, Trump announced that he had reached an agreement ensuring Iran would never acquire a nuclear weapon.
CNN argued that “the truth may be a little more complicated”. A credible agreement ending Iran’s nuclear ambitions would represent a historic breakthrough, potentially ending a war that has shaken the Middle East and triggered energy market disruptions across the global economy.
Trump Described as an Unreliable Narrator
Such an agreement would also provide Trump with a political exit from a conflict that was initially expected to last only a few weeks when it began in February, but instead stretched into the summer, damaging his standing at home.
CNN described Trump as having long been an “unreliable narrator” of the war, noting that he had declared an agreement was imminent roughly 40 times. The report also pointed out that he repeatedly claimed Iran had surrendered to his demands, even as Tehran publicly demonstrated the opposite through continued resistance and defiance.
The network quoted Seth Jones of the Center for Strategic and International Studies, who said:
“At this point, there is no credible evidence that we have a deal. And if there is a deal, it remains unclear whether it will actually materialise.”
CNN argued that in the absence of solid evidence, many observers are likely to conclude that Trump, known for his promotional instincts, is overselling the agreement while postponing the most important and difficult issue: the future of Iran’s nuclear programme.
Key Issues That Triggered the War May Be Delayed
The report also cited Frank Kendall, who served as Secretary of the Air Force during the administration of former President Joe Biden. Kendall argued that extending a ceasefire for around 60 days while negotiations over Iran’s nuclear programme continue raises a fundamental question.
“This is the reason we entered this conflict, at least ostensibly,” he said.
CNN argued that even if a memorandum of understanding is confirmed and signed, Trump will ultimately be judged against the comprehensive, internationally backed agreement negotiated by former President Barack Obama’s administration, the deal Trump himself withdrew from in 2018.
The report added that Trump will have to answer whether a war that destroyed millions of dollars’ worth of US military equipment and contributed to global economic instability has actually left Americans more secure.
Although Trump is highly skilled at shaping political narratives, CNN noted that wars and determined adversaries eventually reveal realities that rhetoric cannot conceal. The true nature of the agreement will become clear soon enough, and Trump is likely to face difficult questions about whether it is genuine and sustainable.
Talks With No Guarantee of Success
Among the questions raised by CNN is whether the arrangement is merely a deal to reopen the strategic waterway and end the blockade, or whether it genuinely addresses the central issue of Iran’s nuclear programme.
Based on what has been publicly disclosed so far, the agreement may be superficial and far from complete.
The network added that agreeing to hold future talks on Iran’s nuclear programme does not amount to a major breakthrough. History shows that such negotiations often drag on for weeks or months, with no guarantee of success.
CNN also pointed to the issue of Iran’s stockpiles of highly enriched uranium, warning that this alone could derail negotiations at any stage.
Iran has long insisted that it does not seek to build a nuclear weapon. Consequently, obtaining Tehran’s signature on a document reaffirming that position may not carry much practical significance, although Trump may attempt to present it as a major achievement.
A Deal That Resembles the Previous Nuclear Agreement
Forbes reported that the proposed agreement could include sanctions relief and the release of frozen Iranian assets, a move that bears similarities to the 2015 nuclear agreement, formally known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, which Trump criticised repeatedly for years.
The magazine recalled that Republicans sharply criticised the Obama administration after it transferred US$1.7 billion to Iran to settle a longstanding dispute over military equipment.
Trump himself stated in 2018 that the Obama administration had “filled planes with US$1.8 billion in cash and sent it to Iran”.
Several prominent Republican figures have also expressed concern about the emerging agreement.
Former US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo compared the proposed arrangement to the 2015 deal, arguing that such an agreement would effectively provide Iran with funds that could be used to advance weapons of mass destruction programmes and destabilise the region.
Trump Misunderstood the Nature of Iran’s Political System
In a separate analysis, The Spectator argued that the Trump administration entered its confrontation with Iran without fully understanding the nature of the political system in Tehran.
As a result, it now finds itself trapped in a position where it lacks sufficient support to escalate the war while also being unable to force Iran to accept its conditions.
Jonathan Spyer wrote in the British magazine that Trump’s Iran policy has been characterised by a combination of military threats, deal-making ambitions, and a failure to grasp the character of the Iranian system.
According to Spyer, Washington still lacks a clear strategy for escaping the current crisis.
