"A memorandum of understanding with the United States has never been closer," Iranian Foreign Minister Seyed Abbas Araghchi wrote in a social media post, urging the media to "refrain from entering speculation" pending finalization.
Seyed Abbas Araghchi's public note and the push for caution
Araghchi’s post came hours before U.S. officials spoke to reporters, and it framed Tehran’s messaging: the two sides are close to an agreement, but details will be disclosed "in due course." The Iranian foreign minister explicitly asked the media to avoid speculation about the memorandum of understanding (MOU) while negotiators complete the final steps.
A senior U.S. official on signatures, verification and the chemistry of risk
On a White House–organized call with reporters, a senior U.S. official—who declined to be identified—said the administration is "80% to 85% sure" that leaders from the two countries would gather sometime this month, possibly in Europe, to sign an MOU to end the war. The same official emphasized the technical and safety challenges of removing enriched nuclear material: "This is very combustible stuff, very volatile stuff. We're not just going to, like, go down there with a backhoe and a guy with a backpack and start taking it out." The official stressed that "the technical details need to be figured out" even as there is a commitment to remove the material.
What the proposed MOU would set out: Strait of Hormuz, destruction, inspections
According to the U.S. official, the documents being prepared would create a framework to reopen the Strait of Hormuz, destroy enriched nuclear materials, and establish inspections "to ensure Iran doesn’t possess a nuclear weapon." The MOU would also trigger a 60-day technical negotiation in which leaders from both countries work through the specifics the United States wants to see Iran accomplish in order to lift economic sanctions.
The official described the negotiation plan as a "step-by-step process with verification requirements" intended to build trust and "accomplish something meaningful for both Iran and the United States of America." He conceded mutual distrust: "I don't think the Iranians trust us and I don't think the United States trusts the Iranians."
Technical negotiations: removal logistics, verification, and civilian power questions
The U.S. official repeatedly returned to the technical complexity of handling enriched material and the verification mechanisms that must follow a political agreement. The 60-day technical phase will address operational questions about removal and destruction and the inspection regime that would follow.
The official did not rule out Iran having a civilian nuclear program, saying, "We're not bothered at all by the idea of civilian power plants in Iran," but added the U.S. concern: "What we're bothered by is the type of infrastructure that would allow them to jump from civilian power generation to nuclear weapons development and that's what they've had for a very long time." Those distinctions are likely to shape the verification criteria negotiators seek during the technical phase.
What this means for President Donald Trump, negotiators, and Iranian leaders
- President Donald Trump: The president said negotiators had "just made a great settlement of the war with Iran" that would be "subject to finalization of documents" over the next few days, making his role one of endorsing and finalizing a politically sensitive accord once technical terms are resolved.
- Negotiators and technical teams: They will enter a 60-day period to map out removal, destruction and inspection protocols—work the senior U.S. official described as needing detailed technical planning because the materials involved are "very combustible" and "very volatile."
- Iranian leaders and diplomats: Araghchi’s post signals Tehran’s willingness to proceed to signature talks and calls for restraint in public speculation; Iran will be expected to accept destruction of enriched materials and the inspection regime outlined in the MOU framework.
As negotiators move from headline agreement toward operational reality, two facts stand out from the officials’ account: leaders may meet this month to sign a framework that will start a formal 60-day technical negotiation, and the concrete mechanics of removing and destroying enriched nuclear material remain unresolved and are being treated as a separate, technically demanding problem. Whether political momentum converts into a safely executed technical plan will be the defining test in the days ahead.
