US and Iran reach tentative deal but await final sign-off from Trump

_{By Nana Karikari, Senior Global Affairs Correspondent}

A high-stakes diplomatic gamble is unfolding in the Middle East as the United States and Iran edge toward a tentative 60-day ceasefire agreement to pause their three-month-old war. Yet even as negotiators finalize the text of a memorandum of understanding, a dangerous reality has emerged on the ground. A series of escalating military strikes, missile launches, and sweeping economic sanctions threaten to shatter the fragile diplomacy before President Donald Trump grants his final approval.

The whiplash between backroom progress and front-line hostilities underscores the volatility of the conflict. While major stock indexes rose on Thursday in response to a potential diplomatic breakthrough, the reality along the world’s most critical energy corridor remains precarious, with both sides trading blows and accusing each other of violating a nominal truce.

Progress and Nuclear Stumbling Blocks in Flight

The framework of the proposed deal, which American officials report Iran has signed off on but Tehran has yet to publicly confirm, aims to establish a two-month pause in hostilities to kickstart formal nuclear negotiations. The memorandum of understanding would lift restrictions on the Strait of Hormuz, ending a U.S. blockade and allowing unrestricted naval navigation, while simultaneously opening a 60-day window to address Iran’s nuclear program.

Speaking to reporters on the tarmac at Joint Base Andrews in Maryland, Vice President JD Vance confirmed that while a tentative agreement has been reached, the final outcome remains uncertain.

“We’re going back and forth on a couple of language points. I do think we’ve made a lot of progress here,” Vance said. “It’s very clear that I think the Iranians, they want a deal, and they want to open the Strait of Hormuz.”

However, Vance acknowledged that critical hurdles remain regarding Tehran’s atomic ambitions, noting that “it’s hard to say” when or if the president will sign the document.

“There are a couple of issues on the nuclear stuff, the highly enriched stockpile, and also the question of enrichment,” Vance said. “We do think they’re negotiating, at least so far, in good faith, and we’re making some progress. Hopefully, we’ll continue to make progress… the president will be in a position where he can endorse the agreement, but obviously that’s still TBD.”

He tempered expectations further by adding, “I can’t guarantee that we’re going to get there, but right now I feel pretty good about it.”

Trump Seeks a Legacy-Defining Accord

The ultimate fate of the memorandum rests entirely with President Trump, who has expressed dissatisfaction with the current state of the talks and has previously reversed course on diplomatic openings with Iran. Sources familiar with the matter indicate the president is seeking outside counsel to ensure any potential agreement surpasses the 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) negotiated by the Obama administration, a deal Trump famously dismantled during his first term.

Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, speaking at a White House press briefing, emphasized that the administration is holding a firm line in the negotiations.

“The teams have been going back and forth,” Bessent said, noting that Trump has “several red lines” for any agreement, either in the short- or long-term. According to Bessent, these non-negotiable demands include a requirement that Iran surrender its highly enriched uranium stockpile, permanently abandon its pursuit of a nuclear weapon, and ensure the Strait of Hormuz remains free and open, as it was before the outbreak of the war.

Violence Erodes a Shaky Truce

The diplomatic maneuvering stands in stark contrast to the kinetic reality in the region. U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM) reported a series of significant ceasefire violations by Iranian forces over the past 48 hours. According to CENTCOM, Iranian forces launched a ballistic missile toward Kuwait that was successfully intercepted, an action the military command labeled an “egregious ceasefire violation.”

That missile strike occurred hours after U.S. forces intercepted five Iranian one-way attack drones in the Strait of Hormuz and preemptively neutralized a sixth drone at a ground control site in Bandar Abbas. Concurrently, CENTCOM dismissed Iranian state media reports that a U.S. aircraft had been downed near Bushehr, writing on X, “CLAIM: Iran’s state TV claimed Iranian forces downed a U.S. aircraft near Bushehr. FALSE. TRUTH: No U.S. aircraft were shot down. All U.S. air assets are accounted for.”

On Thursday night, the situation grew more convoluted. Iran’s state media outlet, Fars, reported that the country’s armed forces had launched missiles from southern Iran toward unidentified “designated targets.” Around the same time, an Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) navy Telegram account claimed its forces had fired warning shots at four vessels attempting to transit the Strait of Hormuz “without prior coordination or authorization,” attributing local explosions to an “exchange of fire.”

Vice President Vance sought to downplay the immediate threat of these clashes to the overarching diplomatic track. “These ceasefires are always a little messy,” Vance said, adding that “sometimes these things have little flare-ups” but asserting that the U.S. retains the right to launch defensive strikes.

Economic Fury and Geopolitical Warnings

While diplomatic channels remain open, the Trump administration has simultaneously accelerated its economic campaign against Tehran. The State and Treasury Departments announced expansive new sanctions targeting Iran’s oil trade, specifically aimed at choking off revenue to the IRGC, the nation’s most dominant military and economic institution.

“The Department of State is sanctioning numerous entities, individuals, and vessels that form the backbone of Iran’s illicit oil economy, directly targeting the financial lifelines of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) and Iran’s military apparatus,” the State Department said in an official statement.

The Treasury Department detailed that its sanctions target “key players in an oil sales network that has moved tens of millions of barrels of Iranian oil worth billions of dollars,” noting that “these Hong Kong-based entities have facilitated the storage, transport, and sale of this oil, directly funding the IRGC, Iran’s Armed Forces General Staff, and its military apparatus.”

This financial pressure is part of “Operation Economic Fury,” a strategy Secretary Bessent noted has supplanted the administration’s previous military campaign, “Operation Epic Fury.” The economic offensive has also heightened tensions with regional intermediaries. The U.S. recently sanctioned Iran’s newly formed “Persian Gulf Strait Authority,” an entity Bessent dismissed on social media.

“Iran’s Persian Gulf Strait Authority (PGSA) is a joke, and today Treasury has sanctioned it,” Bessent stated. “We have warned any corporate or state entities against paying tolls or hiding them as aid payments.”

The administration’s rhetoric has extended to Oman, amid reports that Muscat was negotiating with Tehran to implement a tolling system for ships transiting the strait. Bessent issued a stern warning on social media, writing, “Oman, in particular, should know that the U.S. Treasury will aggressively target any actors involved — directly or indirectly — in facilitating tolls for the Strait and any willing partners will be penalized.”

This public warning followed a blunt assessment from President Trump during a recent Cabinet meeting, where he insisted the waterway remain unobstructed, declaring that “Oman will behave just like everybody else, or we’ll have to blow ’em up.”

Bessent later clarified that the regular diplomatic channels had yielded reassurances, stating that Oman’s ambassador assured him in a phone call that “there were no plans for tolling the strait.”

Tehran’s Resistance and the Path Forward

The escalating economic pressure and fiery rhetoric have drawn sharp rebukes from Tehran. Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Esmaeil Baghaei condemned the U.S. military strikes on the Bandar Abbas ground station, emphasizing that Iran remains determined to “take all necessary measures” to defend its sovereignty. Baghaei also criticized Washington’s warnings to Oman, calling Bessent’s threats of financial penalties “an absolutely illegal act.”

Furthermore, Iran’s semi-official Tasnim News Agency, citing sources close to the Iranian negotiating team, indicated that significant gaps remain, reporting that the text of the agreement “has not yet been finalized or made definitive” and noting specifically that Tehran has not yet informed the Pakistani mediator that the text is finalized.

For his part, President Trump has projected total indifference to the clock, rejecting any notion that domestic political considerations or the upcoming midterm elections will force his hand into accepting a weak deal.

“They’re getting clobbered. Their economy is in free fall,” Trump said of Iran during a Cabinet meeting, signaling his belief that maximum pressure will eventually force total compliance from Tehran. “They thought they were going to outwait me, you know. ‘We’ll outwait him, he’s got the midterms.’ I don’t care about the midterms.”

With an Arab official involved in the mediation confirming that the outline of a deal was reached days ago, the coming days will test whether residual diplomatic momentum can

survive the ongoing military friction in the Gulf, or if the “messy” realities of the battlefield will permanently derail the prospects of a truce.

Whether this dual-track strategy of military deterrence and economic containment forces Tehran’s ultimate signature—or triggers a broader breakdown along the world’s most critical maritime choke point—remains the central question for regional stability. With the text heavily negotiated but unexecuted, global markets and international observers are left watching a high-stakes standoff where a single miscalculation on the water could instantly overwrite the progress made at the table.

African Economies Bracing for Shipping and Fuel Shocks

The fallout from the blockade and naval skirmishes in the Strait of Hormuz is vibrating heavily across African economies, creating deep anxieties from Accra to Nairobi. As a critical chokepoint handling over 20 percent of global petroleum liquids, disruptions in the Gulf instantly impact African local fuel pump prices and broader inflation dynamics.

In Ghana, economic analysts warn that prolonged instability will complicate domestic efforts to stabilize the cedi and curb rising transport costs. Because many non-oil-producing African nations rely entirely on imports of refined petroleum products, price shocks at sea rapidly transition into higher costs for food, transit, and consumer goods on local markets.

Additionally, regional shipping corridors feel the strain of volatile global supply chains. Financial ministries across West and East Africa are monitoring the situation closely, recognizing that a full collapse of the Gulf ceasefire could lead to severe capital flight from emerging markets and a sharp spike in sovereign borrowing costs.