Fresh confusion has erupted over the emerging U.S.-Iran peace framework after Iranian-linked media directly contradicted President Donald Trump’s claim that the Strait of Hormuz would “open” under a soon-to-be announced agreement.
The contradiction surfaced only minutes after Trump, on Saturday, May 23, declared that a major agreement involving the United States, Iran, and multiple regional powers had been “largely negotiated.”
In a lengthy statement on Truth Social, the president said discussions involving Gulf leaders and regional allies had produced substantial progress toward what he described as a “Memorandum of Understanding pertaining to PEACE.”
The statement followed a high-level call involving leaders from Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Qatar, Pakistan, Türkiye, Egypt, Jordan, and Bahrain.
Trump also disclosed he separately spoke with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and said the conversation “went very well.”
Also Read: Truce at Last: Trump Reveals Iran Peace Deal Timeline, Strait of Hormuz to Reopen
However, Iranian state-linked narratives shortly afterward began pushing back against the U.S. president’s characterization of the developing agreement.
According to Iran’s Fars News Agency, Trump’s description of the Strait of Hormuz arrangement was “incomplete and lacks conformity with reality.”
The report stated that while Iran may permit shipping traffic to return to pre-war levels, Tehran would still retain full operational authority over the critical maritime chokepoint.
“Management of the strait, the determination of routes, timing, manner of passage, and issuance of permits, will continue to be exclusively under the authority and prudent oversight of the Islamic Republic of Iran,” the report stated.
The Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC)-aligned leaders also reinforced the message online, insisting the Strait of Hormuz would remain under “full Iranian administration and sovereignty” regardless of any eventual agreement.
At the same time, reports have emerged of what the proposed framework may include.
Sticking points between the U.S. and Iran
According to details circulated by Al Jazeera and regional sources, the developing agreement could involve:
- An end to fighting across multiple fronts, including Lebanon.
- The reopening of the Strait of Hormuz.
- The release of several billion dollars in frozen Iranian assets.
- The lifting or easing of parts of the U.S. blockade.
- A withdrawal of some U.S. forces positioned near Iran.
- A 30-day timeline to negotiate unresolved nuclear issues.
The nuclear issue remains another major point of disagreement between the two sides.
Trump administration officials have repeatedly insisted Iran’s nuclear capabilities remain central to any agreement.
White House officials have publicly maintained that Tehran must never acquire a nuclear weapon and that enriched uranium concerns must be resolved.
Also Read: Iran Moves Goalposts on Trump Talks, Refuses Nuclear Discussions Until War Ends
The president himself said Saturday he would “only sign a deal where we get everything we want.”
Iranian officials earlier stated that ending the war and stabilizing the region had been prioritized ahead of any nuclear negotiations.
Fars News Agency further claimed “no commitment has been made by Iran” regarding the nuclear issue at this stage.
Several Republican lawmakers have already warned against what they see as excessive concessions to Tehran.
Senator Lindsey Graham questioned why military operations against Iran were initiated if a deal ultimately leaves Tehran with continued regional leverage.
Senator Roger Wicker, chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, went further, describing reports of a possible ceasefire and broader diplomatic arrangement as “a disaster.”
