Iran framework a 'political document', real commitments made through backchannels: US officials
Washington DC, June 17
As Washington and Tehran inch closer to signing the peace agreement, American officials are working quickly to release the text of the agreement, which they have described as a "political document"--leaving space for highly technical in-person talks to come, CNN reported citing US officials.
According to CNN, while US negotiators downplayed the significance of the specific language in the document, they have described the text of the agreement as incredibly vague, mainly intended to create a more favourable environment for the highly technical, in-person talks to come.
As per the officials, the framework is aimed at providing Iran the ability to sell it politically to its internal audience.
As per the official, Trump's team "came up with language that allows (Iran) to say what they need to say for their domestic politics."
The officials further noted that the MOU did not reflect critical back-channel commitments Iran has made to the US, which they argued gave them more confidence in signing on to the arrangement.
"People shouldn't read too much into the language of the MOU," one of the officials said, describing the agreement as a "political document."
"What's more important than the actual document is the understandings we have with each other, and that's why it's important to get it done, that we can create the environment to go and talk about all these things, because it basically says we will release sanctions, we will do a deal with nuclear, we will unfreeze funds," the official told CNN. "But we'll release sanctions when, you know, based on progress. We'll release funds once we've agreed on the mechanisms to do so."
Citing a person who saw the text of the agreement, CNN said that it does not describe in specific detail what commitments Iran has made on its stockpile of highly enriched uranium. Instead, the agreement states in broad terms that Iran "reiterates that it will never produce nuclear weapons"-- a commitment Tehran also made in the 2015 nuclear deal with the Obama administration.
US officials noted that Tehran has "backchanneled" to Washington that they will offer the concessions the Trump administration is looking for. That includes US involvement in the destruction of the enriched materials on site in coordination with the International Atomic Energy Agency. The officials said such a concession is not stated explicitly in the document.
However, the text does spell out in some detail what financial relief Iran can expect if it fulfils its commitments, including the ability to tap into a $300 billion development fund in the future, according to the officials.
This comes despite Trump and Vance being adamant that the fund will not be financed by American dollars.
According to the American broadcaster, the text is less clear about the unfreezing of Iranian assets, noting only that they will be released and made "fully available" when progress is made during further rounds of negotiations, without spelling out a timeline.
As per the agreement, Iran would be able to sell its oil and petrochemical products as soon as the MoU is signed, and the US will issue sanction waivers to allow it to reap financial benefit from the sales.
When asked about the sanction waivers, a US official called the agreement "performance-based," and said Iran would "only access any benefits of the MOU if they abide by all of the points they agreed to -- including no nuclear weapon, neutralizing its enriched material, and not interfering with the free flow of navigation in the Strait of Hormuz."
As the two adversaries come closer to inking the deal later this week, CNN reported citing a person familiar with the discussions, that copies of the peace agreement have been circulating among European and other G7 officials present in France for the high-stakes summit.
— ANI
Reader Comments
As an American, I'm skeptical. Backchannel deals with Iran? Remember the 2015 JCPOA was supposed to be comprehensive, and look where that got us. This vague language feels like history repeating itself. Trump's team should have learned from past mistakes.
From an Indian perspective, stability in the Gulf is always welcome. But the lack of specifics on uranium stockpile destruction is concerning. Iran has been a reliable partner for us in terms of Chabahar port and strategic connectivity. I hope this doesn't lead to more trouble in the region. 🙏
I've been following this saga for years. The US keeps making deals that are "political documents" while Iran continues its nuclear program. Why should we trust backchannels when the public text is intentionally vague? This is diplomatic theater, not real progress.
India has always maintained good relations with Iran - our oil imports, the Chabahar port project, and historical ties. This agreement could reduce tensions and help our energy security. But I'm concerned about the Strait of Hormuz clause - Iran's commitment not to interfere is crucial for global shipping including our trade. Let's hope this works out for everyone. 🇮🇳🤝🇮🇷
The US calling this a "political document" while relying on backchannel commitments doesn't inspire confidence. As someone from a country that values transparency, this whole setup feels unstable. What happens when the next administration comes in and says they don't recognize the backchannel deals? Diplomatic chaos waiting to happen.
We welcome thoughtful discussions from our readers. Please keep comments respectful and on-topic.