Iran is signaling that any diplomatic off‑ramp from its escalating conflict with the United States would have to go far beyond the nuclear deal negotiated under former President Barack Obama.
On Tuesday, President Donald Trump abruptly announced a two‑week ceasefire, pulling back from threats of expanded U.S. strikes just hours before a self‑imposed deadline. The pause, tied to Iran’s agreement to temporarily reopen the Strait of Hormuz, follows weeks of escalating attacks across the region. The two-week ceasefire is intended to be used for negotiations to end the war, and Trump called the 10-point plan Iran put forward a “workable” start for negotiations.
Until the deal is accepted and signed by both parties, it won’t be known what the terms are that the United States and Iran agreed to, and it seems unlikely that Trump would agree to certain items in the plan put forward. The ones laid out by Iranian officials amount to a striking wish list that would eclipse the 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) brokered during the Obama administration, and of which Trump has been critical.
The JCPOA, agreed to by Iran, the U.S. and five other world powers, was narrowly focused on Iran’s nuclear program. In exchange for sanctions relief, Tehran accepted strict limits on uranium enrichment, reduced its stockpile of nuclear material, dismantled thousands of centrifuges and submitted to an intrusive inspection regime overseen by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).
By contrast, Iran’s newly unveiled plan—released as part of the ceasefire announcement—makes no mention of nuclear limits or inspections. Instead, the statement from Iran’s Supreme National Security Council (SNSC) says the U.S. would have to agree to enrichment, lift all primary and secondary sanctions, terminate all U.N. Security Council and IAEA resolutions against Tehran and compensate Iran for war damages.
Those demands alone would exceed the concessions embedded in the JCPOA. Under Obama’s deal, sanctions relief was phased, conditional and reversible, with a snapback mechanism allowing penalties to be reimposed if Iran violated the agreement. The SNSC plan, as written, contains no such enforcement or verification provisions.
Iran’s ambitions in the current proposal extend well beyond nuclear policy. The SNSC statement asserts that the U.S. has committed to withdrawing its combat forces from the region and ending hostilities “on all fronts,” including against Hezbollah and other Iran‑aligned groups that Tehran brands the “Axis of Resistance.”
None of those issues were part of the JCPOA. Obama administration officials deliberately excluded Iran’s regional influence, missile program and proxy forces from the nuclear talks, arguing that folding in broader geopolitical disputes would doom the agreement altogether.
During his speech last week, Trump said he was “honored” to end the Iran Nuclear Deal that Obama put in place and criticized the former president for giving Iran $1.7 billion in cash. He said Obama did it to “buy their respect and loyalty,” which Trump said was a failed attempt.
“They laughed at our president and went on with their mission to have a nuclear bomb,” Trump said. “His Iran deal would have led to a colossal arsenal of massive nuclear weapons for Iran.”
Richard Stengel, former undersecretary of state for public diplomacy and public affairs, posted on X that the ceasefire is a “good thing,” but that he would be surprised if a deal “comes anywhere close to the guarantees the Obama admin got on Iran’s nuclear ambitions.”
Iran is also staking a claim to long‑term leverage over one of the world’s most critical energy choke points. According to Iranian officials, the plan envisions continued Iranian control over the Strait of Hormuz, with shipping allowed only through “regulated passage” coordinated by Iran’s armed forces—a formulation that has alarmed energy markets and U.S. allies alike.
Trump announced the two‑week ceasefire hours before a deadline he had set for Iran to reopen the strait or face expanded U.S. attacks on civilian infrastructure. The president said Iran had presented a “workable basis on which to negotiate” and suggested that “almost all” past points of contention had been resolved, though he did not endorse the specific concessions claimed by Tehran.
Republican Senator Lindsey Graham posted on X that Congress needs to review any deal that is put in place like it did for Obama’s deal when he was in office.
“Fair and challenging questions with a full opportunity to explain, and a healthy dose of sunlight is generally the right formula to understand any matter. Simply put, kick the tires,” Graham said.
U.S. officials have stopped short of confirming Iran’s account of the talks, underscoring that negotiations are still preliminary and that no final agreement has been reached. Still, by anchoring the ceasefire to such expansive terms, Iran appears to be testing how much more it can extract from Trump than it did from Obama.
The contrast between the two frameworks is stark. The JCPOA traded verifiable nuclear constraints for limited sanctions relief and was codified through a U.N. Security Council resolution. Iran’s current proposal is a unilateral political statement issued in wartime, laying out maximalist demands while offering few concrete concessions in return.
Iran now seems to be arguing that Trump, after years of denouncing the 2015 accord as too generous, should sign off on something far more favorable to Tehran. Whether that gambit succeeds remains uncertain.
