The United States and Iran have reached a preliminary memorandum of understanding for a 60-day ceasefire to address nuclear and maritime concerns. This diplomatic move follows reports that the United Arab Emirates has actively participated in airstrikes against Iran alongside American and Israeli forces during the three-month conflict.
State Department officials, speaking on condition of anonymity to Reuters, indicated that the discussions leading to the memorandum took place over a series of closed-door sessions in Muscat, Oman. While the memorandum outlines the technical parameters of the ceasefire, the U.S. State Department has refrained from issuing a formal communiqué, stating that the document remains a “working draft” subject to executive review. In Tehran, the Iranian Foreign Ministry issued a brief statement through its official news agency, IRNA, noting that while they are “open to de-escalation,” they will not accept any terms that infringe upon their sovereign right to maritime defense or nuclear research.
Provisions of the Proposed 60-Day Truce
A framework for a temporary cessation of hostilities is currently under review, according to a 60-day ceasefire agreement reported by ABP Majha. The memorandum of understanding (MoU) aims to stabilize the region and establish a foundation for formal negotiations regarding Iran’s nuclear program. While the terms have been outlined, the deal still requires final approval from President Donald Trump, who has reportedly requested a period of several days to make a definitive decision.
The timeline for the implementation of the maritime provisions is strictly phased. The 30-day window for mine removal begins immediately upon the President’s ratification of the MoU. The U.S. Fifth Fleet, stationed in Bahrain, has reportedly been placed on high alert to monitor the Strait of Hormuz for compliance. According to maritime security analysts cited by Lloyd’s List, any failure by Iran to clear the shipping lanes within the designated timeframe would trigger an automatic resumption of the naval blockade.
The proposed arrangement includes specific mandates for both nations to ensure maritime security in the Strait of Hormuz. Under these terms, Iran is expected to remove maritime mines from the strait within 30 days, ensuring that commercial shipping can proceed without interference or the imposition of tolls. In exchange, the United States would begin a gradual process of lifting its maritime blockade and enter discussions regarding the relaxation of restrictions on Iranian oil sales.
The stability of global energy markets remains a primary driver for these negotiations. The ongoing three-month conflict has already caused significant volatility, leading to a substantial increase in crude oil prices. By addressing the maritime choke points and the blockade, the agreement seeks to alleviate the pressure on the global economy.
Allegations of UAE Participation in Airstrikes
While the United States and Iran negotiate a path toward peace, new details have emerged regarding the scope of the combatants involved in the conflict. Reports from TV9 Marathi indicate that the United Arab Emirates has also been carrying out major attacks on Iran alongside the United States and Israel.
For more on this story, see Iran says draft deal with US would reopen Hormuz shipping.
This involvement has surfaced as a significant complication in the regional dynamic. Citing a report from the Wall Street Journal, the coverage suggests that the UAE has been a direct participant in the war for the past three months, conducting approximately a dozen airstrikes against Iranian targets. The reports claim that the UAE utilized classified intelligence provided by both the United States and Israel to execute these operations.
The Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) has issued a formal condemnation of the reported UAE involvement, labeling the airstrikes as “acts of blatant aggression” conducted in coordination with “Zionist entities.” The IRGC specifically alleged that the strikes targeted logistical hubs near Bandar Abbas and critical radar installations along the Persian Gulf coast. While the United Arab Emirates’ Ministry of Foreign Affairs has not issued a direct rebuttal to the Wall Street Journal’s report, sources within the Emirati government have maintained a policy of “strategic silence” regarding active military participation in the current conflict.
Iran has maintained long-standing suspicions regarding the involvement of Gulf neighbors in hostilities against its territory. The confirmation of these airstrikes suggests that the conflict has not been a simple bilateral struggle between Washington and Tehran, but a more complex multilateral engagement involving key regional players.
Israeli intelligence officials, speaking to Israeli media outlets, have suggested that the coordination between the U.S., Israel, and the UAE was essential for the precision of the strikes. These reports claim that the intelligence shared included real-time satellite imagery and signal intercepts used to identify Iranian mobile missile launchers. This level of coordination marks a significant shift in regional security architecture, moving from covert cooperation to active, multi-national kinetic operations.
This follows our earlier report, Trump says Iran deal ‘largely negotiated’ including reopening Strait of Hormuz.
Nuclear Constraints and Maritime Security
The central pillar of the proposed ceasefire is the management of Iran’s nuclear capabilities. The agreement includes a commitment from Iran to refrain from developing nuclear weapons. The initial 60-day period of the truce is intended to focus heavily on technical discussions concerning uranium enrichment, specifically targeting the management of highly enriched uranium.
The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) has been briefed on the proposed technical discussions. IAEA Director General Rafael Grossi has previously emphasized the need for “unimpeded access” to Iranian nuclear sites, a requirement that is expected to be a central point of contention during the 60-day window. Iranian negotiators have reportedly pushed for the IAEA’s role to be limited to verifying enrichment levels rather than conducting intrusive inspections of undeclared sites, a distinction that remains a major hurdle in the ongoing negotiations.
The success of this diplomatic window depends on the simultaneous resolution of two critical issues:
- The removal of sea mines in the Strait of Hormuz within a 30-day window.
- The establishment of a dialogue regarding uranium enrichment levels to prevent further escalation.
Diplomatic observers in Brussels have noted that the European Union is closely monitoring the fallout of the UAE’s alleged involvement. The EU’s High Representative for Foreign Affairs has indicated that any expansion of the conflict involving more regional actors could jeopardize existing diplomatic frameworks. The tension is compounded by the divergent interests of Saudi Arabia, which has remained officially neutral while reportedly observing the maritime security developments in the Strait of Hormuz with concern for its own oil export routes.
If the ceasefire is ratified, the immediate focus will shift to whether Iran fulfills its maritime obligations and whether the United States follows through on its promises to ease oil sanctions. The tension remains high as the international community waits to see if President Trump’s final decision will favor a diplomatic resolution or a continuation of the current military posture.
