The Trump administration on Sunday, 14 June signalled that a memorandum of understanding (MoU) aimed at ending the ongoing conflict with Iran could be signed within hours, potentially reopening the Strait of Hormuz — one of the world's most critical energy corridors — and paving the way for broader negotiations on Tehran's nuclear programme. The announcement came as senior US officials expressed confidence in the deal's progress despite fresh Israeli strikes against Hezbollah targets in Lebanon.

Key Statements from US Officials

US Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth, speaking in an interview with CBS News, said: 'From all I know, we are on track. It's not a matter of if, it's a matter of when.' He described the proposed arrangement as 'performance-based', making clear that Tehran would receive no tangible benefits unless it fulfilled its commitments. 'There will be no money released to Iran until they perform,' Hegseth said. 'There's no trust here, and we're going to verify everything.'

US Ambassador to the United Nations Mike Waltz, appearing on ABC News, echoed that confidence, stating that President Donald Trump had 'every intent' of completing the agreement. Waltz said Iranian negotiators were keeping the teams 'hands full' but that the President remained committed to closing the deal.

What the Proposed MoU Would Require

According to the administration, the agreement would mark the first formal step toward ending more than three months of conflict that has severely disrupted shipping through the Strait of Hormuz. Waltz outlined the core demands: Iran must abandon highly enriched uranium, walk away from its enrichment capabilities, and end support for regional proxy groups. 'The highly enriched uranium has to go. Their enrichment capabilities, they have to walk away from. Their support for terrorist proxies has to end,' he said.

Officials also stressed that the deal would unfold within what is currently described as a 60-day framework, though critics have questioned whether that timeline is realistic.

How This Differs from the 2015 Nuclear Deal

The Trump administration was emphatic in distancing the emerging agreement from the 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) negotiated under former President Barack Obama. Hegseth characterised the earlier accord as 'a path to a bomb', while describing the proposed MoU as 'a wall to a bomb' — a framing that signals a significantly more restrictive set of demands on Tehran's nuclear infrastructure.

Critics Push Back

The emerging deal has drawn scepticism from figures closely associated with the Obama-era negotiations. Former President Barack Obama said it was 'doubtful that any agreement that arises is going to be significantly different or a significant improvement from the deal that we had in the first place.' Former Deputy Secretary of State Wendy Sherman, who played a central role in negotiating the original accord, warned that any final arrangement would require extensive technical work and cautioned that the process could take far longer than the 60-day window currently being discussed.

What Happens Next

If signed, the MoU would initiate a phased process aimed at dismantling Iran's nuclear programme and restoring navigation through the Strait of Hormuz — a waterway through which a significant share of global oil supplies transit daily. The deal's durability will depend on whether verification mechanisms satisfy both sides, and whether regional dynamics — including the ongoing Israeli operations against Hezbollah — allow diplomatic momentum to hold.