Iran, US Signal Near-Deal on Nuclear Memorandum as Negotiations Intensify

Tehran and Washington are in the final stages of drafting a memorandum on Iran's nuclear programme, with both sides cautiously acknowledging progress while key sticking points remain unresolved.

By Monexus Staff Writermena5-minute read23 May 2026☆ Save ↗ Share ⎙ Print

Iran's Foreign Ministry confirmed on 23 May 2026 that diplomats from Tehran and Washington are in the final stages of preparing a memorandum on Iran's nuclear programme, a development that, if finalized, would mark the most significant breakthrough in US-Iranian relations since the 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action began unraveling in 2018. Speaking at a regular briefing, Foreign Ministry spokesman Esmaeil Baghaei said negotiators were still addressing outstanding technical questions, though the broad architecture of an agreement had taken shape during talks hosted in Muscat. The statement came hours after US Secretary of State Marco Rubio told reporters that significant news on the Iran file could come within hours, declining to elaborate but describing the mood as one of cautious optimism.

The parallel signals from both capitals point to a window that both sides appear willing to explore, even as deep-seated distrust — rooted in America's unilateral withdrawal from the JCPOA under the Trump administration — continues to shape how Tehran reads Washington's every utterance. The Iranian framing, explicitly stated by Baghaei, frames the current moment as simultaneously close and fragile: progress has been made, but Iran's experience with Washington's "conflicting positions" means that nothing is guaranteed until ink meets paper.

The Substance of the Talks

According to reporting carried by Iranian state-affiliated outlets, the current discussions centre on a set of reciprocal commitments that would see Iran limit its uranium enrichment activities in exchange for partial sanctions relief. The exact parameters remain fluid — the sources do not specify enrichment percentages, the number of centrifuges at issue, or the specific sanctions categories under discussion. What is clear is that negotiators are operating under significant time pressure, with both sides aware that an announcement could come before the weekend.

Rubio, speaking at the State Department on 23 May, was explicit that progress had been made but stopped short of confirming a deal. "It is possible that we will have significant things to say today, tomorrow or in the next few days," he told reporters, a formulation that signals internal deliberation within the US administration about how far to go before an agreement is fully locked. The cautious framing reflects a familiar pattern in high-stakes nuclear diplomacy: the closer the parties get, the more sensitive the language becomes, with officials eager to avoid the perception of having over-promised.

The Trust Deficit

The Iranian Foreign Ministry's own statement contains the most revealing description of the underlying problem. Baghaei said Iran was "very close and also very far from reaching an agreement due to our experience with America's conflicting positions." The phrase captures a structural reality that has defined US-Iranian negotiations since the JCPOA's collapse: Tehran has watched Washington exit a negotiated framework, reimpose sweeping sanctions, and then return to the table demanding further concessions — all while providing Israel with security guarantees that Tehran reads as aimed squarely at Iran.

For Washington, the competing pressure comes from allies. Israel has made clear it views any accommodation with Iran with deep skepticism, and the current Israeli government's position has consistently been that Iran's nuclear programme cannot be tolerated under any circumstances. The sources do not indicate what, if any, assurances have been given to Tel Aviv as part of the current talks, but this variable looms over any announcement. Saudi Arabia, by contrast, has been quietly supportive of a deal that would reduce regional tensions and allow Riyadh to position itself as a diplomatic broker in the broader Gulf architecture.

Regional and Structural Stakes

A successful memorandum — even a partial one — would represent a fundamental shift in the Middle Eastern strategic landscape. It would create space for Iran to seek foreign investment, particularly in its energy sector, while giving the United States a diplomatic win that could be used to stabilize relations with European allies who have grown increasingly frustrated with what they view as incoherent US Iran policy. The European parties to the original JCPOA — France, Germany, and the United Kingdom — have been watching the Muscat talks closely, and an agreement would allow them to claim credit for keeping the diplomatic channel open through years of impasse.

For Iran, the stakes are economic and political. Years of maximum-pressure sanctions have inflicted real damage on living standards, and the current government in Tehran faces domestic pressure to deliver tangible relief. A memorandum that begins lifting restrictions on oil exports, banking transactions, or access to frozen overseas assets would represent a significant political win for President Masoud Pezeshkian's pragmatic wing. Conversely, if the talks collapse — as they have before — the hardliners in Tehran will be strengthened, and the prospect of further escalation, including military dimensions, will grow more plausible.

The broader structural implication is that Washington is operating from a position where its leverage, while still substantial, has been degraded by the sheer complexity of enforcing sanctions across a global financial system that has seen partial adaptation to a US-dominated architecture. Iran has developed alternative trade channels; China's role as a major buyer of Iranian oil has complicated Washington's ability to isolate Tehran completely. This does not mean sanctions are toothless — they remain the most powerful tool in the US toolkit — but it does mean that the ceiling of what Iran can be forced to accept has shifted.

What Remains Unresolved

The sources provide no confirmation that the outstanding technical questions — presumably around monitoring mechanisms, the timeline for sanctions removal, and the scope of Iran's continued research and development activities — have been resolved. Rubio's own language suggests the administration is not yet ready to declare victory. The phrase "conflicting positions" from the Iranian side carries weight precisely because it reflects a pattern recognition built over years of broken commitments.

Whether the gap is bridgeable will depend on details that have not yet been made public. The US side, according to reporting from outlets including Axios, has been negotiating through intermediaries in Oman, a venue that has historically been acceptable to both parties. The Omani foreign ministry has not issued a public statement as of the time of this reporting, though diplomatic sources familiar with the process describe the current phase as "sensitive" and "decisive." The next twenty-four to forty-eight hours are likely to determine whether this round of talks produces a memorandum, a pause for recalibration, or a breakdown.

—

Monexus covered this developing story from the perspective of both Tehran and Washington simultaneously, providing the Iranian Foreign Ministry's full quote in context rather than leading with the US State Department's framing as the dominant narrative. The wire services have treated this as primarily a US-diplomacy story; the structural context of Iranian sanctions pressure and the JCPOA's unraveling received less attention in the initial cycle.

Wire provenance

This editorial synthesis draws on the following public wire/social posts:

https://t.me/Intelslava/28432
https://t.me/tasnimnews_en/10891
https://t.me/JahanTasnim/19234
https://t.me/abualiexpress/15447
https://t.me/GeoPWatch/8901