A deal is inches away, according to Iran.
It is largely negotiated, according to Trump.
And yet, as Monday morning arrived, nothing had been
signed, nothing had been announced, and the naval
blockade remained in place. It is Monday the 25th of May
2026, day 87 of Operation Epic Fury.
The ceasefire holds, the Strait of Hormuz remains closed, and
the world is watching a negotiation that appears
simultaneously to be on the verge of conclusion and
stubbornly unfinished. This is Epic Fury, the US Iran
war podcast. There is a great deal to work
through today. Let us get straight into it.
The headline of the past 24 hours is not a deal signed.
It is a deal described, sketched and debated, but not yet
formalized. On Saturday, President Trump
posted on Truth Social that an agreement to end the war and
reopen the Strait of Hormuz had been largely negotiated.
He said the final aspects and details were being discussed and
that an announcement would come shortly.
That post sent global markets moving.
It generated immediate diplomatic activity across at
least eight capitals. It set off a chain of public
statements from Washington, Tel Aviv and Tehran that, taken
together, reveal both how close and how complicated this moment
actually is. Begin with what United States
officials said. Senior American officials,
speaking to multiple outlets on Sunday, confirmed that a
memorandum of understanding have been agreed in principle.
The deal as described would unfold in two phases.
The first phase would extend the existing ceasefire by 60 days
and reopen the Strait of Hormuz to commercial shipping.
During that 60 day window, Iran will be permitted to sell oil
freely on international markets. the United States naval blockade
of Iranian ports will be lifted, though the timeline for that
lifting will be tied to performance.
The American position, as one official described it, was
relieved for performance. Iran wanted funds unfrozen
immediately. the United States said that would only happen
after tangible concessions have been delivered.
The second phase would address the harder questions.
Iran's nuclear program, its stockpile of highly enriched
uranium, and the long term security architecture of the
region would all be subject to formal negotiations during that
60 day period. The draft memorandum of
understanding includes A commitment from Iran never to
pursue nuclear weapons and to enter into negotiations over a
suspension of uranium enrichment and the removal of its
stockpile. Crucially, however, no
requirement for Iran to export that stockpile before the deal
takes effect was included in the memorandum.
That is a significant concession to Iranian sensitivities and a
significant gap between what the deal says and what both Israel
and some American officials have been pushing for.
One senior United States official told reporters flatly
that no agreement will be signed on Sunday.
The reason given was that the Iranian system did not move fast
enough. That is a diplomatic
formulation. What it almost certainly means
is that the memorandum still required approval from Iran's
Supreme National Security Council and from Supreme Leader
Mojtaba Khamenei himself. The official added that
Washington understood Khamenei had endorsed the broad template
of the agreement. Iran offered no immediate
confirmation of that and provided no elaboration on what
an endorsement in principle actually meant in practice.
Iran's foreign minister, speaking on Sunday, took a
markedly different tone from the American side.
He said that an agreement was just inches away.
But in the same statement, he criticized what he described as
maximalist demands from United States negotiators.
He said the two sides were close, but that the American
position on certain points remained and his
characterization unreasonable. Those remarks suggest that while
the broad framework may have common A's blessing, the fine
print is still being contested. Iran's military spokesperson
Ibrahim al Fakar added another layer of complexity by posting
on social media an artificial intelligence generated image of
President Trump on his knees before Supreme Leader Mujtaba
Khamenei with the caption The end.
Trump, for his part, posted his own artificial intelligence
generated image, an Iranian naval vessel being destroyed by
United States drone, with the caption adios.
These were not the communications of two sides that
had quietly concluded a diplomatic agreement.
They were the communications of two sides that were still, at
some level, engage in a contest over the narrative of who had
won this war. That contest matters more than
it might appear, because the internal politics on both sides
depend on the story told about what this deal means.
In Washington, Trump needs the deal to look like a decisive
American victory, a war that destroyed Iran's military
infrastructure into the nuclear threat and restored freedom of
navigation, all on American terms.
In Tehran, the supreme leader needs the deal to look like
resistance vindicated, a war that Iran survived, in which the
Islamic Republic endured the most intensive military campaign
against it in its history, and emerge with its government
intact, its sovereignty preserved, and a formal
agreement that lifted the blockade and allowed Iranian oil
to flow again. Both of those narratives can
coexist in the same memorandum of understanding.
That is, in part why a deal appears achievable.
But the exact language of the document determines which
narrative is more credible, and that is why the fine print is
still being fought over. Secretary of State Marco Rubio,
speaking at a press conference in New Delhi on Sunday, said he
believed further news on the Iranian situation could come
later that day. It did not.
Rubio acknowledged that progress had been made over the preceding
48 hours. He said there was, in his words,
a pretty solid thing on the table in terms of Iran's ability
to open the Strait of Hormuz and enter into a real significant
time limited negotiation on nuclear matters.
He said the potential agreement had strong support from Gulf
States and from the international community more
broadly. He added that President Trump
was not in a hurry and would not make a bad agreement.
Those last two lines carry some weight.
They are a signal that the United States is not going to
move the final goal posts simply to get a deal done quickly.
If the terms are not right, the blockade stays.
Trump reinforced that message separately.
He stated that the United States would not rush into a deal and
that the American naval blockade of Iranian ports would remain in
full effect until the final agreement was reached and
signed. The role of outside actors in
getting to this point deserves attention.
Pakistani Army Chief Field Marshall Asim Munir travelled to
Tehran on Friday and Saturday for direct talks with Iranian
President Massoud Posseshkian and senior officials.
Iran signalled afterwards that the conversations had produced
narrowing differences. Pakistan, which has served as
the primary mediator throughout the ceasefire period, appears to
have played a significant role in bridging the gap between the
two sides over the final weeks. Qatari negotiators were also
involved. The Gulf states more broadly
have strong economic incentives to see the Strait of Hormuz open
again. Their enthusiasm for a deal is
not simply diplomatic, it is financial, and it is urgent.
The Iranian news agency Tasneem, which is close links to the
Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, published its own account
of what the potential memorandum of understanding contains.
According to Tasneem, shipping through the Strait of Hormuz
would return to pre war levels within 30 days of the agreement
taking effect. the United States naval blockade will be
completely lifted within 30 days.
At least part of Iran's frozen overseas funds would be released
in the first phase. The deal would also include an
end to the war on all fronts, explicitly including Lebanon.
That last element is significant.
Lebanon had been a complicating factor in earlier rounds of
negotiation. the United States and Israel initially insisted
that the ceasefire with Iran did not cover Lebanon, where a
separate ceasefire between Israel and Hezbollah had been
operating since the 16th of April.
Iran had pushed in previous rounds of talks for Lebanon to
be included in any final agreement.
Based on Tisnim's account and other reporting, Lebanon is now
incorporated into the framework. Whether that holds through final
ratification remains to be seen. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin
Netanyahu entered the public conversation on Sunday for the
first time in response to the emerging deal.
He posted on social media saying that Iran would never have a
nuclear weapon. He said he had spoken with Trump
and that they were in agreement that any final arrangement with
Iran must eliminate the nuclear danger.
He defined that as dismantling Iran's nuclear enrichment sites
and removing its enriched nuclear material from Iranian
territory. He also said Trump had
reaffirmed Israel's right to defend itself against threats on
every front, including Lebanon. Netanyahu's statements served
multiple purposes. It was reassurance to his
domestic audience that Israel score security requirements had
not been negotiated away. It was a signal to Washington
that Israel expected the nuclear issue to be resolved, not merely
deferred. And it was implicitly a warning
that if the memorandum of understanding did not address
the nuclear file adequately in the second phase, Israel
retained a right to act unilaterally.
Netanyahu did not threaten to blow up the deal, but his
statement left no ambiguity about where Israel's red lines
remained. The economic dimension of this
moment is difficult to overstate.
The conflict has produced what multiple Gulf states described
as the worst global energy crisis in decades.
Oil prices have remained significantly elevated
throughout the ceasefire period. The Strait of Hormuz closure has
disrupted supply chains not just in Europe and Asia, but in
countries far removed from the Middle East.
Myanmar, to cite one example reported over the weekend, had
found itself unable to receive fuel and fertilizer shipments
because the vessels carrying those supplies were trapped in
the Strait. The damage to global trade has
been both immediate and cumulative.
White House economic adviser Kevin Hassett told CBS on Sunday
that prices would fall quickly after the Straight and Iran's
oil refineries reopened. Economists were more measured.
Most assessment suggested that while oil prices would drop upon
an agreement being announced, the logistical backlog of
delayed and rerouted shipping would take weeks, possibly
months, to clear. The disruption to refinery
schedules, long term supply contracts and insurance markets
would not resolve overnight. Even the best case scenario, a
deal signed this week, the blockade lifted within 30 days.
Mines cleared from shipping lanes would produce a recovery
measured in months, not days. The Federal Reserve, watching
inflation run persistently above target throughout the conflict,
has kept interest rates on hold. Rate cut expectations that were
priced into markets before the war began have not returned.
Investors are now hoping that a sign agreement this week might
shift the calculus, but the Fed is given no indication it is
prepared to move quickly, regardless of diplomatic
developments away from negotiating table.
A brief military incident added tension to Sunday's proceedings.
Iran's military claimed it had shot down an Israeli
surveillance drone operating over Iranian territory.
The Israeli Defense Forces said they were not familiar with any
such incident. The two accounts cannot both be
true. The disputed claim appear to be
a posture rather than a crisis, Iran demonstrating even in the
final hours of negotiation that it remained militarily active
and alert. The incident produced no
escalation. The ceasefire held, but it
served as a reminder that the conflict has not yet formally
concluded and that the mechanisms which could reignite
it are still operational. The broader international
community expressed cautious encouragement.
The European Union and the United Kingdom both welcomed the
progress reported over the weekend, without endorsing a
deal that had not yet been formally announced.
European governments, which have watched the conflict depress
their own economies and complicate their energy security
planning, have strong incentives for an agreement.
Their public statements stopped well short of celebration,
reflecting an awareness that negotiations at this stage could
still unravel. What is the state of play?
As Monday begins, A memorandum of understanding is reportedly
drafted. Its broad template has
reportedly received endorsement from Iran's supreme leader.
The two sides have agreed in principle on the shape of A2
phase arrangement that would open the straight, extend the
ceasefire, lift the blockade and defer the harder nuclear
questions to a 60 day negotiating window.
Iran says it is inches away. the United States says it is largely
done. Neither side has signed it,
neither side has announced it, and at least some points of
language remain under dispute. The honest assessment is that
this deal is closer to completion than any previous
moment in this 87 day conflict is also not done.
Negotiations at this stage, with this much at stake, in a region
with this much history of last minute collapse, cannot be
declared resolved until they are.
The world has watched potential agreements in the Middle East
dissolve before, sometimes within hours of being described
as imminent. The people most familiar with
these negotiations are the ones being most careful with their
language. Three things will determine what
happens next. Whether Iran's Supreme National
Security Council formally approved the memorandum and
forwards it to Common A for ratification.
Whether the language on the nuclear file satisfies Israel
sufficiently that Netanyahu does not act in ways that destabilize
the agreement before it is signed.
And whether the Trump administration's principle of
relief for performance can be squared with Iran's demand for
immediate, tangible sanctions relief and asset releases before
it begins opening the straight. If those three conditions are
met, the war that began on the 28th of February ends not with a
collapse or a military defeat, but with a diplomatic document.
If any of them fails, the blockade continues, the pressure
mounts, and the question of whether the United States is
willing to return to active military operations to force a
conclusion comes back into focus.
The world is watching a negotiation that is almost done,
almost is doing a great deal of work in that sentence.
Beyond the immediate diplomatic calculus, it is worth stepping
back to consider what 87 days of this conflict is actually
produced. When Operation Epic Fury began
on the 28th of February, the stated objectives were to
dismantle Iran's missile capabilities, destroy its
nuclear program, degrade its naval forces, and ensure Iran
never obtained a nuclear weapon. The military dimensions of those
objectives have been substantially achieved.
Iran's air defenses were degraded in the opening days.
Its missile production infrastructure was struck
repeatedly. Its naval assets were largely
destroyed or rendered inoperable.
Its nuclear sites at Natan's Fordow, Isfahan, and Iraq were
hit with weapons specifically designed to destroy hardened
underground facilities. The scale of destruction to
Iran's military and industrial infrastructure has no modern
precedent outside of a declared Total War.
And yet the Islamic Republic has not collapsed.
Mojtaba Khamenei remains, by all available evidence, the supreme
Leader. The government in Tehran is
negotiating, not surrendering. The Iranian state apparatus,
though severely degraded, has not disintegrated.
The Iranian people, despite early protests and significant
internal discontent, did not mount.
The revolutionary uprising that both Trump and Netanyahu had at
various moments appeared to anticipate or encourage that
outcome. A devastated but surviving
Iranian state seeking A negotiated exit is what is now
producing this memorandum of understanding.
That is not a failure of the military campaign.
It is simply the reality of what military force can and cannot
achieve. It can destroy physical
infrastructure on a massive scale.
It cannot by itself determine how political systems respond,
how populations rally or fracture, or how governments
calculate their survival interests.
Iran calculated that it could absorb the military punishment
and negotiate from whatever position remained.
It has not been proven wrong. The deal now being finalized
reflects that reality. It is not the unconditional
capitulation that some voices in Washington and Tel Aviv had
hoped for. It is a framework that gives the
United States its primary strategic objectives and into
active hostilities, A commitment against nuclear weapons
development and the reopening of the Strait of Hormuz in exchange
for lifting the blockade, releasing frozen assets, and
deferring the most demanding nuclear verification questions
to a subsequent negotiating round.
Whether that subsequent round produces A durable and
verifiable nuclear agreement, or whether it becomes another cycle
of diplomatic progress and collapse, is a question that
cannot be answered from the opening terms of a memorandum of
understanding. It is a question that will
unfold over months and years. What is clear today, on Day 87,
is that the immediate question is whether the document gets
signed. The contours of the agreement
appears set, the political will on both sides appears for now
sufficient. The mediators have done their
work. The only remaining question is
whether the final language can be agreed, the required
approvals obtained, an announcement made before the
fragile equilibrium of this ceasefire breaks down again.
There is one further element worth examining before closing
today's episode, and it concerns the question of what a
successful deal would mean for the broader regional order that
emerges from this conflict. The Middle East that existed on
the 27th of February, the day before the bombs fell, is gone.
The Iran that existed on that date no longer exists in the
same form. Its military capacity is
dramatically reduced. It's proxy network, already
weakened by years of Israeli operations against Hezbollah and
its own internal costs, has been further degraded.
Its deterrent posture has been fundamentally altered.
The regional states that sheltered under or accommodated
Iranian influence will be recalibrating.
Saudi Arabia, which was conducting its own quiet
diplomacy with Tehran before the war, now watch as a neighbor
reduced to the status of a party suing for an exit from a
conflict it did not start and could not finish.
The Gulf states, which suffered Iranian missile strikes on their
territory, now contemplate A strategic environment in which a
battered Iran agrees to arrangements it would have
rejected outright a year ago. Iraq, Syria and Yemen all
contain the debris of Iranian proxy investment forces and
relationships that will take years to assess and longer to
reconstruct. None of this resolves into a
simple picture of regional stability.
A weakened Iran is not necessarily a cooperative Iran.
A regime that has survived military devastation by
negotiating its way to the table may yet reconstitute its
capabilities and ambitions once sanctions ease and revenue flows
again. That is precisely why the
nuclear verification provisions of the second phase negotiations
will matter so enormously. The memorandum of understanding,
if signed, is the beginning of a diplomatic process, not the end
of 1. The 60 days ahead, assuming a
deal is reached, will be among the most consequential in recent
Middle Eastern history. They will determine whether the
commitment Iran makes on paper translates into verifiable
actions on the ground. They will determine whether the
United States can hold together an international coalition
willing to reimpose pressure if Iran fails to deliver.
And they will determine whether the region moves haltingly and
imperfectly toward a new security equilibrium or whether
it sets the stage for another cycle of escalation somewhere
further down the road. If this podcast is helping you
make sense of what's happening, take 2 seconds to leave a five
star rating on Spotify or Apple Podcasts.
It makes a huge difference to how many people find the show.
And if you want the deeper breakdown of what's really going
on and where this is heading, you can unlock the premium
episodes directly in Spotify or Apple Podcasts.
Day 87 ends with a deal that is almost there.
The world hopes that almost becomes done.