BBCUnited States
Goldstein: -6.5Tone: 20.0CAMEO 14
Weapons, money and ships: How is this Iran deal different from others?
President Donald Trump has formally signed a deal with Iran to end the conflict that began on 28 February when the US and Israel launched air strikes against Tehran and across the country.
The terms of the 14-point Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) between the US and Iran have been criticised over what is included and what is left out.
There have also been questions about how the agreement - which lays the groundwork for talks on Iran's nuclear weapons programme - will also affect economic sanctions and access to the Strait of Hormuz.
Comparisons have inevitably been made between this deal and the 2015 Obama-era nuclear accord known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) which Trump scrapped in his first term.
To make sense of the current deal, BBC Verify has looked through key details of the documents to compare it with the situation during three distinct periods:
1. When the JCPOA was in force between 2016 and 2018
2. Before the war began on 28 February 2026
3. Now the MoU has been signed
Weapons
The whole point of the JCPOA - which included the UK, France, the EU, China and Russia - was to impose specific limitations on Iran's nuclear programme.
That highly technical document restricted Iran's stockpile of nuclear material to 300kg and said it could not enrich its uranium above 3.67% for 15 years. This level of enrichment is not high enough to be used in nuclear warheads but can be used in reactors to generate electricity.
The JCPOA also allowed the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) access to Iran's nuclear programme to ensure it was complying with the agreement.
The IAEA said Iran had been complying until Trump withdrew the US from the JCPOA in 2018, calling it "decaying and rotten".
Following the collapse of that deal Iran stepped up its nuclear programme.
At the start of the war on 28 February 2026, Iran possessed approximately 440kg of uranium enriched to 60%, according to US officials. The material can be fairly quickly enriched to the 90% threshold needed for weapons-grade uranium.
While the new MoU text, as read out by the White House to the BBC and other media organisations, states that Iran "reaffirms that it shall not procure or develop nuclear weapons" there is little detail about the issue in the document.
There is similar language in the JCPOA, which stated "Iran reaffirms that under no circumstances will Iran ever seek, develop or acquire any nuclear weapons".
The new MoU also says the two parties "agreed to discuss the issue of enrichment" and to "resolve the disposition of stockpiled enriched material pursuant to a mechanism that will be mutually agreed upon" - again, suggesting this will be included in forthcoming negotiations.
In recent weeks Trump has said that Iran's remaining nuclear material will be removed from the country.
US officials briefed that the deal "sets a minimum standard where… the enriched stockpile will be destroyed". But the MoU actually makes no mention of this happening.
It is important to bear in mind that the JCPOA was a final, detailed, agreement negotiated over two years while the MoU is framework for 60 days of talks about a nuclear agreement so the two are not directly comparable.
As well as tackling Iran's nuclear weapons programme, Trump said on 2 March, shortly after the start of the conflict, the US was "destroying Iran's missile capabilities… and their capacity to produce brand new ones".
But the MoU text makes no mention of Iran's ballistic missiles.
And Trump said on 17 June that it would be "unfair" for Iran not to have these missiles given other countries in the region have them.
In 2018, when he scrapped the JCPOA, Trump complained: "Not only does the deal fail to halt Iran's nuclear ambitions, but it also fails to address the regime's development of ballistic missiles that could deliver nuclear warheads."
Money
The 2015 JCPOA did not involve the US paying Iran new money but provided sanctions relief and restored Iran's access to some of its own assets, including those of its central bank, that had been frozen or seized abroad.
An official at the US Treasury estimated in 2015 that unfrozen Iranian central bank assets were worth between $100bn and $125bn - but did add that the total assets which Tehran could access as a result of the sanctions relief would only be around $50bn.
Economic sanctions were re-imposed on Iran after Trump scrapped the JCPOA and were progressively stepped up in the following years.
Before the war began on 28 February sanctions by the US and other countries had created extreme economic difficulties in Iran.
The state of the economy is considered to be one of the causes of country-wide protests across Iran which were violently repressed by the government in January.
The US also placed sanctions on Iranian oil which made it difficult for Tehran to sell its crude overseas - although it was able to partially get round them by using a "shadow fleet" of tankers.
The new MoU says the US will "terminate all types of sanctions" against Iran in an agreed-upon schedule.
But significantly it allows for the issuing of waivers immediately after the signing of the deal allowing "the export of Iranian crude oil, petroleum products and derivatives and all associated services including banking, transactions, insurances, transportation".
There are no conditions upon Iran for this and it apparently leaves it in a much better position than at the start of the war.
The memorandum also says the US along with "regional partners" will develop a plan, funded with "at least $300bn", for the "reconstruction and development" of Iran.
Ships
Before the recent conflict began ships carrying oil, natural gas and fertiliser had been able to pass freely through the Strait of Hormuz for many years.
In fact, the narrow seaway was not mentioned at all in the JCPOA.
Ship-tracking data published by the International Monetary Fund (IMF) shows a daily average of 94 merchant ships transited the strait in 2025.
Since the conflict began on 28 February, the daily average number of transits collapsed to just six, according to this data, though a number have been crossing with their location transmitters turned off so the true figure will likely be somewhat higher.
This collapse was due to a combination of Iranian attacks on commercial shipping that began shortly after the war started and a US blockade of Iranian ports.
The MoU states that the US will "fully end" its naval blockade of Iran "within 30 days".
It also states that Iran will "make arrangements using its best efforts for the safe passage of commercial vessels with no charge" through the Strait of Hormuz but adds that this will be "for 60 days only".
Thereafter it says Iran will "conduct dialogue" with Oman "to define the future administration and maritime services in the Strait of Hormuz".
On 21 May Iran announced that it had unilaterally established a Persian Gulf Strait Authority to regulate shipping through the waterway.
And Iran's foreign ministry is reported to have said this week that, although there will not be "transit tolls" for shipping, there will be "fees" for using the strait which will be "charged in exchange for the services that are provided".
The deal, and indeed the White House's commentary around it, makes no mention of taking action to stop Iran from charging these fees in the future - which would be a boost to Iran's economic power and influence in the region relative to the situation before the war.
Open article →GDELTWisconsin
Goldstein: 1.0Tone: -2.6
Wisconsin lawmakers react to the U.S. deal with Iran
WASHINGTON, D.C. (WEAU) - We’re hearing from our Wisconsin senators about the U.S. agreement with Iran to end the war.
As negotiations continue, at least one lawmaker is still doubting whether an agreement will be reached at all.
“Sadly, we didn’t have full attendance for various reasons. And so that was at least a part of the of the issue. But I think it’s quite possible that some of my Republican colleagues who had previously joined us were taking the president’s word that a deal to end the war, or an agreement to end the war was upon us and around the corner. I think they’ll soon find out that that’s not the case,” said Senator Tammy Baldwin.
Baldwin says Congress can’t wait and must act now. This comes after the Senate failed to advance a resolution that would limit President Donald Trump’s war powers for the 9th time.
“Even if there is truly an MOU, a memorandum of understanding to pause for 60 days for further negotiations, this is not an end to the war. And so, yes, Congress absolutely needs to continue acting to end this war once and for all,” said Baldwin.
The measure would have required congressional approval for any further military action against Iran.
Wisconsin Republican Senator Ron Johnson is speaking out in support of the deal but says he doesn’t believe Iran can be trusted.
He believes the Trump administration was relying on the Iranian people to overthrow Tehran and since that hasn’t happened, conflict must end, at least temporarily.
The Senator has not voted with Baldwin on a war powers act but says president Trump has already recognized the need to end conflict and limit economic damage. Johnson spoke with reporters from Bloomberg Tuesday. Below is a transcript from that video.
Remember, we significantly degraded their nuclear capability, their NAVY, their missiles, their drones, didn’t eliminate them. Didn’t eliminate the revolutionary guard, the Basij Police Force. We really needed the Iranian people to do that. They also didn’t have the capability to do it. I mean, the ayatollahs declared war on the West 47 years ago. They’ve been digging in. They’ve been preparing for this moment. They are fanatics. It’s hard to get fanatics to change overnight and go ‘Oh, okay. We’ve seen the error of our ways.’ So again, this is the reality on the ground. President Trump, I think recognized that reality and opened up the straits. Again, devastating to parts of our economy if we continue so he’s recognizing reality, he’s moving forward, but we can always go back in there if they raise their ugly head and start threatening the region, threaten America again.
The senator says that the American people have a say in this and are broadly against the level of ground troop deployment necessary to end the war now.
Johnson says he’s happy the president plans to reopen the strait, but if peace with Iran doesn’t advance, he says we can “always go back in there.”
Copyright 2026 WEAU. All rights reserved.
Open article →NPRUnited States
Goldstein: 5.0Tone: 100.0CAMEO 08
With Iran deal, Trump told ships to 'start your engines.' That's not happening yet
With the announcement of an agreement to extend a ceasefire and reopen the Strait of Hormuz, Friday is the day President Trump said merchant ships can once again sail unimpeded through the Strait, or as he pronounced, "Ships of the world, start your engines."
Well, not so fast.
Despite the president's pronouncement, there are still questions about how quickly commercial ships can start moving, and whether Iran will truly allow those ships to resume free access in what is an international waterway. There are still some 1,500 ships stuck inside the Persian Gulf waiting to leave, according to industry analysts, including hundreds of ocean-going vessels such as oil tankers.
Before the U.S. and Israel waged war against Iran at the end of February, 140 ships passed through the Strait each day, according to both industry analysts and U.S. officials. The attacks against Iran led its leaders to close the Strait to traffic by firing drones and missiles at ships and laying mines along the shipping lanes, according to U.S. officials.
The U.S. has already started removing some of those mines and opened up a new pathway off Oman so ships can leave and not have to hug the Iranian coast, said Capt. Tim Hawkins, spokesman for U.S. Central Command.
"It's been a U.S. effort," Hawkins said, adding he would not talk about how long such an effort would take.
But now that an agreement has been announced, Britain and France will take part in demining, Prime Minister Keir Starmer said this week.
"The UK and France have taken a leading role up to this point," he said, "particularly to offer support on mine clearance in an agreed way."
British officials said they would deploy autonomous mine hunting sea drones along with counter drone systems, Typhoon jets and the HMS Dragon, all part of a defensive mission to secure freedom of navigation. American officials have not detailed what assets the U.S. military is using for the demining mission, but military analysts say the U.S. is using a mix of drone boats, helicopters and warships.
A U.S. official briefing reporters this week said an increased number of commercial ships are already transiting that southern route off Oman.
"We've been getting as much as 25 ships through a day," said the official, who asked not to be identified under the ground rules for the briefing. "I think they'll probably go to maybe 40 to 50 pretty quickly. That's just the southern line. By Friday, everything will be fully open."
As far as when there will be business as usual for the Strait of Hormuz? "So I think it will return to normal pretty quickly, definitely within 30 days," the official said.
"That's realistic based on the fact that the U.S. has taken out a high number of [Iran's] minelaying vessels," said Scott Savitz, a senior engineer at the RAND School of Public Policy who has provided analytical support to the U.S. Navy and its mine warfare command. And the demining efforts should achieve "an acceptable level of risk," he added.
Still, Tom Bartošák-Harlow, a spokesman for the International Chamber of Shipping, a trade association for shipowners and operators, doubted whether merchant ships would quickly start their engines and head for the exit.
"There's still a lot of risks associated with transit," he told NPR in an email. "It's very likely to be a gradual process of confidence amongst shipping companies. That's likely to be through a series of actions rather than just one."
He cited two of those actions: "Confirmation" that the areas of transit do not contain mines, as well as assurances that the agreement between the U.S. and Iran "is holding."
Besides de-mining, there's also the issue of any kind of fees imposed by Iran on commercial ships sailing through the Strait of Hormuz.
Bartošák-Harlow said there's no conclusive evidence of who has and who has not paid a toll in the past, and there wasn't any sort of record, adding that companies should not be paying a toll for passage through an international waterway.
Trump insisted the Strait of Hormuz will be "permanently toll free" and Vice President JD Vance said it will be "toll free for the long term." The Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps set up a so-called toll booth back in March. It's unclear whether any ship owners paid the toll.
Now, a spokesman for Iran's Foreign Ministry, Esmaeil Baqaei, says vessels transiting the Strait will not pay tolls but instead pay "service fees" for navigation-related facilities, environmental protection and maritime support services.
That distinction does not pass legal muster, said James R. Holmes, chair of maritime strategy at the U.S. Naval War College.
"There is no provision in international law for a coastal state charging for passage through a natural waterway, whether you call it a toll or a fee or whatever," Holmes told The New York Times.
What's uncertain is whether the Trump administration, once the agreement is unveiled, will agree that a toll and a fee are one and the same.
Open article →