US and Iran Reach Tentative Agreement to Extend Ceasefire, Officials Confirm

US and Iran reach tentative deal – U.S. and Iranian representatives have outlined a preliminary agreement to prolong their temporary ceasefire for 60 days, according to sources within the American administration. This development follows weeks of tense military confrontations in the Middle East, where both nations have accused each other of breaking the fragile truce. While the deal has not yet been formally endorsed by President Donald Trump or Iran’s leadership, it marks a significant step in the ongoing diplomatic efforts between the two countries.

Regional Tensions Escalate Amid Ceasefire Talks

Recent clashes in the region have intensified the urgency of the agreement. The Iranian Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) claimed to have launched an attack on an American airfield, retaliating for fresh U.S. airstrikes targeting southern Iran. These incidents have raised concerns about the stability of the ceasefire, which was established in early April. Despite the renewed hostilities, U.S. officials believe the framework of a new truce could stabilize the situation temporarily.

“The agreement provides a temporary pause in hostilities, allowing both sides to focus on addressing the nuclear issue,” said a U.S. official, emphasizing the importance of the 60-day extension. However, the official added that the final approval from Trump remains pending, as the president has yet to confirm the terms of the deal.

Key Provisions of the Tentative Ceasefire Memorandum

The draft memorandum of understanding (MOU) released by Iranian state media includes several key provisions. Notably, it proposes the removal of Washington’s naval blockade on Iranian ports, the withdrawal of U.S. military forces from the immediate vicinity of Iran, and the restoration of non-military traffic through the Strait of Hormuz. This critical waterway, which serves as a vital route for global energy exports, has been a focal point of tension due to its strategic importance. A full closure of the strait would disrupt the flow of approximately one-fifth of the world’s liquefied natural gas and oil, impacting international fuel markets.

Under the proposed agreement, Iran would have 30 days to clear mines from the shipping channel, while the U.S. would lift its sanctions on oil exports. This could enable Iran to resume selling its crude oil without immediate restrictions, providing economic relief. The MOU also includes provisions for the U.S. to consider diluting Iran’s enriched uranium stockpile, either domestically or in a third location. This move would address concerns about Iran’s nuclear capabilities, which have been a central point of contention.

Trump’s Mixed Signals and the Path Forward

President Trump has expressed cautious optimism about the potential deal. During a cabinet meeting on Wednesday, he stated that negotiations were advancing but noted the Iranian proposal still required refinement. “The terms are not there yet, and we need to work more,” he said, underscoring the need for further discussion. Despite this, Trump has hinted at the possibility of finalizing the agreement within days, though the exact timeline remains uncertain.

Earlier in the week, Trump revealed that he had been close to authorizing new strikes on Iran, but held off at the request of U.S. allies. This decision, he claimed, was a strategic move to keep the door open for diplomatic solutions. However, the White House has been skeptical of the agreement’s validity, with Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent cautioning against premature confirmation. “It’s always a mistake to get out ahead of the president,” Bessent remarked, adding that the final decision rests solely with Trump.

The deal’s confirmation by U.S. officials is notable, as it aligns with Axios’ earlier report on Thursday. The media outlet first detailed the terms of the tentative agreement, which was reportedly presented to Trump for review. While the White House has not officially endorsed the MOU, the alignment of details suggests a growing consensus between the two nations. This is a rare instance of U.S. sources corroborating an anonymously sourced report, indicating the deal may be closer to fruition than in previous stages of the ceasefire.

Historical Context of the Ceasefire Negotiations

The current agreement builds on the initial ceasefire, which took effect on 8 April. Since then, Trump has frequently indicated that a broader deal was within reach, only for hopes to be dashed by failed negotiations in Islamabad. The latest talks, however, have shown renewed momentum, with both sides signaling progress in the past week. “We’ve made strides, but the work isn’t done,” said a senior U.S. diplomat, highlighting the complexity of the issues at hand.

The proposed extension of the ceasefire allows for the continuation of discussions on Iran’s nuclear program, a topic that has dominated U.S.-Iran relations for years. Key points of contention include Iran’s uranium enrichment levels and the potential for the U.S. to accept or collaborate on reducing its stockpile. The agreement also addresses the broader geopolitical implications of the Strait of Hormuz, a vital corridor for global energy trade. If the terms are finalized, it could ease pressure on the region and provide a breathing space for diplomatic dialogue.

Despite the progress, the threat of returning to combat operations—referred to as “option B”—remains active. Trump has reiterated this possibility, stating that the U.S. is prepared to resume strikes if necessary. “Option B is always on the table,” he warned, adding that the ceasefire’s extension is a temporary measure. This dual strategy reflects the administration’s approach to balancing military readiness with diplomatic engagement.

Speculation and the Road to Finalization

Analysts speculate that the deal could be finalized by the end of the week, pending Trump’s approval. However, the exact process remains unclear, with officials acknowledging that the next 24 hours will determine the outcome. The U.S. has not yet confirmed the MOU’s details, and Iran has not officially endorsed the framework. This uncertainty underscores the delicate nature of the negotiations, which must navigate political and strategic interests on both sides.

The proposed agreement also raises questions about the long-term implications of the ceasefire. While the immediate extension aims to de-escalate tensions, the deeper discussions on Iran’s nuclear program could shape the future of U.S.-Iran relations. “We need to focus on the deal first, then move to reconstruction,” said Bessent, emphasizing the administration’s prioritization of immediate stability over broader geopolitical goals. The success of this agreement could set the stage for a more permanent resolution, but challenges remain in aligning the two nations’ objectives.

As the situation unfolds, the international community watches closely. The extension of the ceasefire may provide a window for further talks, but the fragile nature of the agreement means that any breakthrough is contingent on mutual trust and agreement. For now, the framework outlined by U.S. and Iranian officials represents a critical moment in a conflict that has spanned years, with both sides vying to secure their interests in a rapidly evolving geopolitical landscape.