DOHA (Realist English). Negotiations between the United States and Iran aimed at peacefully resolving the conflict have, over the past 24 hours, demonstrated just how fragile even temporary agreements remain. Despite signals from both sides about “significant progress,” a final agreement has yet to be signed. The diplomatic process has encountered new military incidents and a hardline position from Israel.
Negotiating process in Doha
On May 25, a high-level Iranian delegation, including Parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf and Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi, arrived in Doha to continue talks with the US side, with Pakistan and Qatar acting as mediators. The parties were expected to discuss remaining disagreements over the text of a memorandum of understanding.
However, new complications emerged alongside the diplomatic consultations. Explosions of unclear origin were reported in Bandar Abbas and coastal areas near the Strait of Hormuz. Iranian media stated that the situation was under control, but the incidents further heightened tensions.
US strikes “in self-defence”
Early on May 26, US armed forces carried out strikes against targets in southern Iran. According to US military officials, two Iranian boats allegedly involved in laying naval mines, along with a surface-to-air missile system, were destroyed.
The Pentagon described the operation as an “act of self-defence.” The strikes triggered fresh concerns about the durability of an already fragile ceasefire.
Key points of disagreement
The main disputes continue to revolve around three unresolved issues.
Nuclear programme
Iran insists that nuclear issues should not be discussed during the first stage of any agreement.
“The 14-point memorandum of understanding focuses on ending the war. Following that, issues related to the nuclear programme can be discussed within 60 days,” Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Esmaeil Baghaei said.
The United States, meanwhile, continues to demand immediate guarantees regarding the elimination of enriched uranium stockpiles.
The fate of enriched uranium
President Donald Trump reiterated his position on Truth Social:
“Enriched uranium will either be immediately handed over to the United States for removal and destruction, or destroyed on-site — or at another acceptable location — under IAEA supervision.”
According to media reports, Iran may be prepared to transfer uranium to third countries, including China, while maintaining its right to continue uranium enrichment.
Unfreezing assets
Tehran views the lifting of oil sanctions and the release of frozen assets as a prerequisite for continuing negotiations.
According to media reports, some progress has reportedly been made regarding the release of approximately $6 billion in Iranian assets. US Secretary of State Marco Rubio also stated that a potential agreement could allow Iran to generate up to $10 billion in oil export revenues within 60 days.
Reactions and expert assessments
Russian and Western experts largely agree that the memorandum currently under discussion could serve only as a temporary arrangement and may not resolve the underlying contradictions.
Experts on the nuclear issue
Middle East specialist Vladimir Sazhin believes that any agreement reached now would amount more to a pause than a final settlement:
“Iran will insist on preserving its nuclear programme in one form or another and will not agree to dismantle it completely.”
Political analysts on the political calculus
Malek Dudakov argues that the Trump administration is seeking to lower fuel prices ahead of congressional elections, while domestic hardliners have already begun accusing the president of “capitulation.”
Risks of a breakdown
Andrey Kortunov, Director General of the Russian International Affairs Council, stated that Israel’s position and pressure from hawkish factions within Washington make any long-term guarantees extremely difficult.
“Violations of the ceasefire arrangements are almost inevitable even if an agreement is reached.”
The Israeli factor
On May 25, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu pledged to “crush” Hezbollah in Lebanon, a position that directly contradicts mediators’ efforts to establish ceasefires across multiple fronts.
Israeli opposition leader Yair Lapid also criticised the prospective agreement, calling it “bad for Israel.”
Markets and outlook
Financial markets reacted to the mixed signals with a noticeable decline in oil prices as hopes for a diplomatic breakthrough persisted. However, analysts warn that if negotiations collapse, prices could rapidly return to previous highs.
Despite public expressions of optimism from both sides, US-Iran relations remain highly tense. The coming days may prove decisive both for the diplomatic process and for global energy markets.