Iranian lawmaker raises concerns over reported U.S.-Iran memorandum of understanding

Iranian lawmaker Mahmoud Nabavian, Deputy Head of Parliament’s National Security Committee, has voiced concerns over provisions contained in a reported memorandum of understanding (MoU) under discussion between Iran and the United States, while also acknowledging what he described as improvements in the draft text.

Speaking on the reported negotiations, Nabavian said revisions had been made to the first clause of the document. According to him, the original wording referred to “the end of the war on all fronts,” but was later changed to “the end of military operations on all fronts, including Lebanon.”

Read also: Police launch investigation after body found near Iran’s World Cup training base in Tijuana

He argued that the revised language would make it more difficult for either side to justify continued military action, though he maintained that the document should explicitly identify the United States as the aggressor.

Nabavian also pointed to a reported provision requiring the withdrawal of U.S. military forces from the region within 30 days of signing a final agreement. However, he expressed concern that the scope and details of such a withdrawal had not been clearly defined.

According to details circulating about the proposed framework, the process would unfold in two phases. The first phase would reportedly include an immediate regional ceasefire, including in Lebanon, the release of part of Iran’s frozen assets held abroad, and sanctions waivers covering Iranian oil and petrochemical exports.

Read also: Iran Sets July 9 for the burial of former Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei

The reported framework further states that within 30 days of signing the MoU, restrictions on maritime access would be lifted and the Strait of Hormuz would reopen under Iranian management. Following that period, both sides would enter a 60-day negotiation process aimed at reaching a final agreement covering sanctions relief, nuclear issues, and the future of the U.S. military presence in the region.

Despite those provisions, Nabavian criticized what he described as the postponement of key Iranian demands to a future final agreement. He argued that issues such as broad sanctions relief, U.S. troop withdrawal, and long-term economic arrangements remain dependent on a final deal whose timeline could be extended.

The lawmaker further questioned reports that Iran would freeze aspects of its nuclear programme during the interim period, including enrichment activities and reconstruction of damaged nuclear facilities, while U.S. sanctions and military deployments would remain in place pending a final agreement.

Meanwhile, reports have also suggested that U.S. President Donald Trump supports a framework under which Iran’s enriched uranium stockpile would remain inside the country and be gradually downblended rather than transferred abroad. Under the reported proposal, sanctions relief would be linked to the pace of uranium dilution, allowing Tehran to retain control over its stockpile throughout the process.

Neither Washington nor Tehran has officially released the reported memorandum, and the details remain subject to ongoing negotiations.

Follow the Neptune Prime channel on WhatsApp:

Do you have breaking news, interview request, opinion, suggestion, or want your event covered? Email us at neptuneprime2233@gmail.com