What Is the Latest Status of the Iran–U.S. Negotiations?
WANA (May 28) – Published reports and news coverage suggest that, contrary to some media narratives, the United States has agreed to Iran’s proposed framework for continuing the negotiations, and the draft text under discussion has reportedly been structured according to that format.
Current Iran–U.S. relations appear to be approaching a highly sensitive stage, with signs pointing toward the possibility of a temporary 60-day agreement centered on the managed reopening of the Strait of Hormuz, an extension of the ceasefire, and postponing discussions of the nuclear file to later stages.
At the same time, ongoing political and military pressure from the United States, along with Donald Trump’s insistence on keeping the military option on the table, has created an atmosphere of “cautious optimism” mixed with “deep structural distrust” throughout the negotiation process.
While Trump has described the talks as “constructive” and emphasized the need to expand the Abraham Accords in the region, Benjamin Netanyahu continues to insist on a complete halt to Iran’s nuclear activities and the removal of enriched materials from the country — an issue widely viewed as Tel Aviv’s red line in the negotiations.
A woman walks near a billboard featuring an image of the late Supreme Leader of Iran, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, in Tehran, Iran, May 11, 2026. Majid Asgaripour/WANA (West Asia News Agency)
Within Iran itself, differing views over the negotiations are also evident. Some reformist factions, moving away from an approach based solely on trust, stress the importance of maintaining a balance of power and preserving domestic unity. Meanwhile, critics warn against repeating the experience of the JCPOA and creating another prolonged “no war, no peace” situation.
At the same time, some media outlets opposed to the Islamic Republic have focused on the suspension of military attacks, arguing that the Trump administration has ignored the demands of protesters.
On the regional and international level, recent developments are being interpreted by some analysts as a sign of Iran’s growing structural resilience and its ability to impose security-related costs on Arab states along the Persian Gulf. Global markets have also reacted positively to the possibility of an agreement, with oil prices falling and Asian stock markets rising.
Under these circumstances, an important question arises: how long can the current fragile situation continue, and what could trigger a turning point? Answering this question requires a closer examination of the negotiations and the behavior of the various actors involved.
What Is Still Blocking an Iran–U.S. Deal?
WANA (May 24) – Recent developments surrounding negotiations between Iran and the United States suggest less a path toward a final agreement and more a complex, multilayered process still burdened by major disagreements. While Tehran and Washington appear to have moved closer to a mutual understanding in certain areas, significant gaps remain on the most […]
What Has Happened in the Talks Between Iran and the Mediators?
Media narratives suggest that the United States and its allies are facing a kind of dual-track approach toward the Iran file — a situation that can be described as “simultaneous pressure and negotiation.” On one hand, Western media outlets continue to highlight the possibility of military action, cybersecurity and drone-related threats allegedly linked to Iran, and Trump’s focus on the Iran issue in an effort to maintain pressure.
On the other hand, the dispatch of mediators from several regional countries to Tehran, along with reports from outlets such as the Financial Times, Reuters, and The Atlantic describing the military option as costly and ineffective, indicate that Washington is still searching for a political path to manage the crisis.
Some analysts interpret this approach as an attempt by the United States to preserve its political and media standing before both domestic public opinion and regional allies, while at the same time gradually stepping back from some of its earlier maximalist positions.
In this context, Western media coverage appears to focus on three primary themes:
- Portraying Iran as responsible for deadlock in the negotiations in order to justify diplomatic failure.
- Amplifying security-related threats associated with Iran — including cyber and drone allegations — with the aim of increasing political and security pressure.
- Highlighting internal and regional divisions, as well as emphasizing the role of groups aligned with Iran across the region.
Nevertheless, some analyses suggest that Netanyahu’s reduced direct influence over the negotiation process, combined with regional concerns about the consolidation of Iran’s deterrence capabilities, may indicate a shift in the current balance of power.
Will Trump Accept the Deal — or Return to War?
WANA (May 25) – So far, Pakistani Army Chief Asim Munir’s visit to Tehran has reportedly led to a “serious breakthrough” in negotiations between Iran and the United States toward a temporary and preliminary agreement — a scenario that, as previously noted, always seemed plausible. Following this memorandum of understanding, the two sides are […]
What Are the Four Proposed Steps Toward an Agreement?
Assessments of the negotiations suggest that Iran has entered the talks with a high degree of distrust and is attempting to prevent a repeat of previous experiences by relying on confidence-building mechanisms. Accordingly, if an agreement is reached, the United States would first be expected to carry out a series of initial measures, while Iran would refrain from taking new nuclear-related steps during the first phase.
Within this framework, any potential agreement is said to depend on preliminary confidence-building actions by the United States, and implementation of a final agreement would not move forward until those steps are carried out.
Some reports also indicate that Iran’s proposed negotiation framework has been accepted, and that the draft agreement has been prepared accordingly.
Under this format, the potential agreement would include four stages:
- A halt to hostilities by the United States and Israel across all fronts, including Lebanon, beginning from the first day of implementation.
- The release of part of Iran’s frozen assets immediately after the agreement is reached.
- The easing of economic restrictions and the lifting of elements of the economic blockade against Iran during the initial phase of implementation.
- The suspension of Iran-related oil sanctions throughout the negotiations aimed at reaching a final agreement.
According to reports, these stages are expected to be implemented without interruption, and the United States has reportedly agreed in principle to these arrangements.
Overall, the current atmosphere of the negotiations reflects efforts by both sides to establish a temporary and manageable framework, although deep distrust and fundamental disagreements remain unresolved.
Some analysts believe that after facing rising regional and operational costs, Washington is now more interested than before in preventing further escalation and moving toward a controlled agreement, while Iran is simultaneously seeking to secure clearer conditions and stronger guarantees within the negotiation process.
The Naval Blockade and the Ceasefire That Strengthened Washington’s Hand in Negotiations
WANA (May 28) – The Strait of Hormuz dossier went through a remarkable trajectory during the Ramadan War and the subsequent negotiations — one that offers a clearer picture of the dimensions of the agreement currently under discussion: The war began on March 1 with a joint U.S.-Israeli attack that resulted in the assassination […]
