President Donald Trump said Sunday that the United States would not rush into a deal with Iran. The statement marks a shift from earlier comments in which he indicated that negotiators were close to finalizing an agreement.
The reported framework under discussion is a 60-day memorandum of understanding. Iran would remove naval mines from the Strait of Hormuz to allow commercial shipping to resume.
In return, the United States would ease restrictions on Iranian ports and oil exports. Details of the proposal were first reported by outlets including Axios and the New York Post. The White House has not released the full text of the memorandum.
Talks come after months of conflict between the United States and Iran that began earlier in 2026. U.S. and Israeli strikes targeted Iranian nuclear facilities last year. A ceasefire has been in place, but tensions remain high over Iran’s nuclear program and control of key shipping routes.
Shift in Rhetoric
Trump had previously described the negotiations as advanced. In recent weeks, he stated that a deal was “largely negotiated” and that final details were under discussion. On Sunday, he emphasized a more measured pace.
“I’m in no hurry,” Trump said in comments reported by PBS. Administration officials described the current proposal as an initial step rather than a final agreement.
Secretary of State Marco Rubio rejected suggestions that the United States would allow Iran to strengthen its nuclear capabilities. Rubio stated that any deal must prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon.
Also Read: Rubio Says Iran Talks Close to Breakthrough Deal
The memorandum would not fully resolve Iran’s nuclear program. Issues such as uranium enrichment limits and verification measures would remain for later discussions.
Iran has laid mines in the Strait of Hormuz in recent months, disrupting the flow of oil that accounts for about one-fifth of global supply. Clearing those mines is a central element of the reported 60-day plan.
Republican Criticism
The proposal has drawn criticism from senior Republicans in Congress. Senators Lindsey Graham, Ted Cruz, and Roger Wicker have publicly opposed easing sanctions or restrictions before Iran takes concrete steps to dismantle its nuclear infrastructure.
Graham and other senators have argued that the approach risks repeating problems from the 2015 Iran nuclear deal under President Barack Obama. A group of 52 senators signed a letter in May stating that any agreement must require Iran to end uranium enrichment activities. They called for full dismantlement of key capabilities before any sanctions relief.
Also Read: Confusion After Iran Contradicts Trump’s Hormuz Claim as Details of Proposed Deal Emerge
Trump has pushed back against the criticism. He has said any agreement reached during his administration would differ sharply from previous deals and would prioritize U.S. security interests. The administration has maintained that military options remain available if diplomacy fails.
Negotiations have involved multiple rounds of indirect talks, including sessions hosted with Pakistani mediation. A previous ceasefire extension was tied to progress on opening the Strait of Hormuz. Iranian officials have reviewed U.S. proposals but insisted they would not give up their right to enrich uranium for civilian purposes.
Why This Matters
The debate over the Iran negotiations exposes divisions within the Republican Party on foreign policy, sanctions strategy, and the use of military pressure in the Middle East. It occurs amid ongoing concerns about oil supply routes, nuclear proliferation risks, and U.S. commitments in the region during Trump’s second term.
The administration has not set a fixed deadline for concluding the memorandum. Public statements from U.S. and Iranian officials continue to show differences in tone and expectations. Lawmakers and allies are watching closely as talks proceed.
