The United States and Iran are close to signing a memorandum of understanding that would extend a ceasefire for 60 days, immediately reopen the Strait of Hormuz, and launch negotiations on Iran’s nuclear program, according to The Washington Post and Axios. President Trump said the deal could be signed in Europe as early as this weekend, but Iran’s foreign minister subsequently stated nothing has been “finalized,” adding uncertainty to the prospect.

Event Details

The MOU, dubbed “The Islamabad Agreement,” was jointly mediated by Qatar and Pakistan. Under the draft terms, the Strait of Hormuz would reopen immediately without tolls, with shipping volumes returning to pre-war levels within 30 days. The US blockade would be lifted simultaneously.

On the nuclear front, Iran would commit to never acquiring a nuclear weapon and agree to resolve the standoff over its enriched uranium stockpile. A senior US official said one option under consideration was down-blending Iran’s highly enriched uranium inside the country under UN supervision. However, any concrete steps would depend on a second, more detailed accord being reached.

Trump described the broader agreement as a “great settlement” and said signing could take place in Europe this weekend. Iran’s foreign minister contradicted this, saying the deal was “never finalized.”

According to Axios, citing a diplomat from a mediating country and a US official, several contentious issues remain unresolved.

Panorama Analysis

The deal’s conclusion would have far-reaching implications for the global energy landscape. The Strait of Hormuz carries approximately 20% of the world’s oil shipments, and its reopening would directly ease the surging international oil prices that have persisted since the conflict began. The blockade had caused shipping insurance costs to skyrocket and forced vessels to reroute via the Cape of Good Hope, dramatically increasing supply chain costs.

From a geopolitical perspective, the Islamabad Agreement marks the rise of Pakistan and Qatar as mediation powers. The traditionally US-dominated Middle East peace process now features a multipolar mediation model, which could set a precedent for resolving other regional conflicts.

The inclusion of a nuclear framework represents another significant breakthrough. Although implementation details await further negotiation, Iran’s commitment to never develop nuclear weapons under international supervision marks the most important diplomatic development since the US withdrawal from the JCPOA in 2018.

Multiple Perspectives

US Position: The Trump administration frames the deal as a diplomatic victory, emphasizing the “great settlement” that would end hostilities and restore freedom of navigation.

Iran Position: Iranian official attitudes are contradictory. While agreeing to the framework and promising to reopen the strait, the foreign minister publicly stated nothing was “finalized,” suggesting domestic hardliner resistance.

Mediator Perspective: Pakistan and Qatar have expressed positivity about the progress, though Iran’s contradictory statements have placed mediators in an awkward position.

Market Reaction: Oil prices fluctuated following the news, but investors remain cautious about the deal’s final implementation.

Editor: GoodInfo Global News Team

President Trump abruptly canceled planned strikes on Iran’s oil infrastructure hours after issuing his toughest threat yet, as mediators signaled a peace deal is nearing finalization. Trump stated on social media that he expects a deal to be signed “within the next few days,” sending oil prices tumbling and Asian markets higher.

Event Details

According to Axios, Trump announced late on June 11 that he was calling off military action against Iranian oil facilities, declaring the conflict essentially settled “subject to finalization.” CNBC cited White House sources saying the agreement would be signed “in the coming days.”

The reversal came just hours after Trump had issued his most aggressive public threat, vowing in all-caps to hit Iran “very hard tonight” and threatening to “take Iran’s oil infrastructure.” The dramatic pivot caught diplomatic observers off guard.

Multiple mediating parties reportedly conducted intensive shuttle diplomacy over the past 48 hours. While the specific mediating nations have not been publicly confirmed, Pakistan and other countries had previously been reported as participating in US-Iran dialogue. Iran has not issued an official statement, but sources close to Tehran told media that “substantial progress has been made on core issues.”

Oil prices fell sharply following the news, with Brent crude dropping over 3% at one point. Asian stock futures rose broadly, reflecting the market’s positive reaction to peace prospects.

Analysis

The dramatic reversal carries profound implications for global geopolitics and energy markets. First, the swing from the brink of military conflict to the negotiating table demonstrates that diplomatic channels remain a critical safety valve even in highly adversarial relationships. Trump’s “maximum pressure” approach — issuing the hardest threat first, then suddenly signaling peace — has become a signature negotiating tactic.

Second, months of US-Iran tensions have inflicted real economic damage globally. Oil prices surged from roughly $75 per barrel before the conflict to over $125, with US gasoline prices rising more than 50%. A peace deal would ease global inflation pressures and secure the Strait of Hormuz, through which approximately 20% of global oil trade flows.

Third, this episode underscores the irreplaceable role of multilateral mediation in modern international conflicts. Shuttle diplomacy by third parties provided a crucial channel for breaking deadlocks when direct bilateral talks were suspended.

Perspectives

Optimists view Trump’s sudden pivot as pragmatic diplomacy. A former US Middle East envoy noted: “However dramatic the process, the end result is avoiding another Middle East war. That’s the best outcome for the US, Iran, and the entire region.”

Cautious analysts warn against premature optimism. The International Crisis Group cautioned: “Over the past six months, both sides have repeatedly signaled deals were imminent, only to see them collapse at the last moment. Nuclear issues, sanctions relief timelines, and Hormuz security arrangements remain three core sticking points.”

Market analysts are cautiously optimistic. Goldman Sachs noted in a report: “Even if a deal is ultimately signed, full implementation will take months. Oil prices may fall to the $90-95 range near-term, but returning to pre-conflict levels will take time.”

Editor: GoodInfo Global News Team

US President Trump issued his sternest public warning yet to Iran, threatening to strike Iran’s oil infrastructure and posting on social media that he would hit the country “very hard tonight.” The statement has drawn deep international concern about further escalation in the Middle East and global energy supply security.

Details

According to Politico, Trump posted an strongly worded statement on social media threatening to “take Iran’s oil infrastructure” and emphasizing in capital letters that he would hit the country “very hard tonight.” This statement was seen as a major escalation in US pressure strategy toward Iran.

The US has previously imposed multiple rounds of sanctions on Iran, and reports indicate US military conducted operations targeting Iran-related assets in the Middle East. Three Indian sailors were unfortunately killed in a US strike on an oil tanker, further intensifying the gravity of the situation.

Iran has not yet formally responded to the latest threat, but Tehran has previously stated that any military provocation would face “devastating retaliation.”

Analysis

Trump’s statement carries profound implications for global energy markets and geopolitical dynamics. Iran, as an OPEC member producing roughly 3 million barrels daily, would see its economy devastated if oil infrastructure were struck. More broadly, it could trigger global crude supply shortages and push up international oil prices. With US producer prices already showing their largest annual jump since 2022, surging oil costs would further intensify inflationary pressures.

The escalation also tests relationships between the US and its Gulf allies. Saudi Arabia and the UAE, while competing with Iran geopolitically, equally worry about regional conflict expansion affecting their own economies and security.

This event underscores energy security’s central role in great power competition. As the global energy transition advances, traditional oil geopolitics is undergoing profound changes, but oil’s status as a strategic resource remains irreplaceable in the near term.

Editor: GoodInfo Global News Team

Belgium’s government announced on Thursday that it is planning to buy its nuclear reactors from French power giant Engie, in order to secure the country’s energy supplies.

Prime Minister Bart De Wever said the deal would involve “a full takeover” of the nuclear fleet, including Belgium’s seven ageing nuclear reactors. The move would also mean suspending plans to decommission nuclear operations in Belgium.

“This government is choosing safe, affordable and sustainable energy, with less dependence on fossil fuel imports and more control over our own supply,” De Wever posted on X.

The move would reverse the phase-out of nuclear energy legislation approved in the early 2000s amid safety concerns. The original legislation prohibited the building of new nuclear power plants and limited the operating lifetimes of existing ones to 40 years.

Only two of Belgium’s seven nuclear reactors are currently operational — located at plants in Doel and in Tihange — and their operating licences were recently extended until 2035.

The other five reactors were shut down between 2022 and 2025, and plans to dismantle them will now be suspended.

Engie and the Belgian government said they aim to reach an agreement on the takeover of the nuclear stations by 1 October.

In a joint statement with Engie, the Belgian government said the move also highlights its aim to extend operations of existing nuclear reactors and to develop “new nuclear capacity” in Belgium.

“By doing so, the Belgian Government is taking responsibility for Belgium’s long-term energy future, with the objective of building a financially and economically viable activity that supports security of supply, climate objectives, industrial resilience and socio-economic prosperity,” the statement adds.

Belgium is one of a number of European countries revising their nuclear strategy, making a “complete U-turn” after years of reluctance about investing in nuclear energy.

All seven nuclear reactors had at one point been set to close by 2025. The reactors have long been controversial — they have been shut down repeatedly for safety checks and have sparked fear in neighbouring countries.

Tensions flared in 2015 when plans to use reactors beyond their 40-year design life was met with complaints coming from cities across nearby borders. The German city of Aachen even began offering iodine tablets to residents in 2017 over safety fears about the reactors at Tihange, following closures over cracks and water leaks.

Source: BBC News