A new 60-day negotiating window is opening between the US and Iran for a temporary agreement on Tehran's nuclear program. The interim deal is expected to be formally signed on Friday in Switzerland.
The agreement envisions the reopening of the Strait of Hormuz for global oil shipments and the provision of phased financial incentives to Iran contingent on compliance steps. The parties plan to conduct intensive talks during this period on the future of Iran's nuclear program.
Cautious optimism in Washington, sharp skepticism in Congress
U.S. President Donald Trump said the initiative was launched to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons. Trump stressed that he sees Tehran's nuclear ambitions as a fundamental threat to regional stability.
However, many senators, analysts and regional allies argue that reaching a comprehensive agreement in such a short time is difficult. The criticism focuses particularly on the complexity of the technical details and the tight deadline.
It is recalled that the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action signed in 2015 was completed in over 18 months through multilateral and intensive diplomacy. In the new process, a similar outcome is expected in a much shorter period.
Republican Senator Lindsey Graham said he is skeptical about whether Iran will completely stop uranium enrichment. Graham said the question of what a good agreement would look like remains open.
David Schenker of the Washington Institute for Near East Policy also drew attention to the technical aspects of the process. Schenker noted that nuclear diplomacy requires experts who master the details and long-term coordination.
Step-by-step relaxation, progress in exchange for sanctions relief
The US side argues that the phased approach was chosen to create leverage. Vice President JD Vance said Iran will only receive sanctions relief and other incentives if it takes verifiable steps.
Vance said, "We look at what people do. The structure of this deal is: The more steps they take, the more they gain." The US administration is approaching the assurances given by Iran with caution.
Iran continues to maintain that its nuclear program is peaceful. However, it remains uncertain whether the agreement will be limited only to technical issues such as uranium enrichment, centrifuge development and heavy water production.
The agreement that came into force under former President Barack Obama imposed restrictions on Iran's nuclear activities while providing billions of dollars in sanctions relief. However, Donald Trump withdrew from the agreement in 2018 and described it as "the worst deal ever negotiated."
Calls for oversight grow in Congress
The new process is also being closely watched in the US Congress. While Republican Senator Ted Cruz argues that the final decision should rest with Congress, Senator John Kennedy expressed deep doubts about Iran's compliance with commitments.
Democratic Senator Tim Kaine noted that previous diplomatic frameworks could provide a technical basis. Kaine pointed out, however, that the current timeline is short and the current team has limited experience.
In previous negotiations, experienced diplomats and technical experts were involved, and intensive multilateral coordination centered in Vienna was carried out. Critics think that the lack of similar depth in today's team could make it difficult to resolve critical issues on time.
Another issue facing the process is whether the agreement will be limited to the nuclear file or also cover areas such as Iran's ballistic missile program, support for regional proxy forces, and domestic political repression. These issues are of particular importance to allies in Europe and the Middle East.
Brian Katulis of the Middle East Institute pointed out that reaching a full-scale agreement is difficult. Katulis said the deal is essentially an effort to stabilize the current situation rather than inflaming a new conflict.
Ahead of the expected signing in Switzerland, attention is focused on whether the 60-day diplomatic timeline will be enough to overcome the mistrust between the two sides. The outcome of the process will show whether the temporary framework can turn into a permanent nuclear accord.
