Where Things Stand Right Now

Trump met with his national security team Friday in the White House Situation Room. The goal: decide whether to approve a memorandum of understanding that would extend the US-Iran ceasefire for 60 days and kick off nuclear talks, according to BBC News.

No deal has been signed. No agreement has been announced. What exists is a framework — pending approval from both Trump and Iran's leadership.

Trump posted his terms publicly on Truth Social.

Trump's Non-Negotiables, In His Own Words

According to BBC News, Trump laid out three hard demands:

1. Iran must agree to never develop a nuclear weapon or bomb.
2. The Strait of Hormuz must be reopened for "unrestricted shipping traffic, in both directions."
3. Any mines in the waterway must be "destroyed."

He also demanded Iran allow the US to remove and destroy its enriched uranium. And he added: "No money will be exchanged, until further notice."

That last line matters. One of the loudest criticisms of the 2015 Obama-era JCPOA was the sanctions relief and cash flows to Tehran. Trump is explicitly trying to wall that off — at least for now.

Iran's Answer: 'Concessions Come Through Missiles'

Iran's public posture directly contradicts the idea that a deal is close.

According to AP News, an Iranian official stated that concessions come "through missiles" — not through negotiation. Iran also said publicly it is NOT negotiating its nuclear programme. Full stop.

US officials are describing a near-done framework while Iranian officials are talking about missiles. One of these things is not true. Either the Iranian negotiators are lying to their own public, or they're lying to ours. Neither option is reassuring.

The Hormuz Tollbooth Nobody Is Talking About

Iran didn't just close the Strait of Hormuz after the US-Israeli strikes in February. According to Reason, Iran turned it into a revenue stream. The Iranian navy began systematically controlling the waterway — banning ships from hostile nations, charging others to use a mine-free safe lane, and cutting side deals with friendly countries.

The US response? Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent had the Office of Foreign Asset Control (OFAC) sanction Iran's Persian Gulf Strait Authority — the Iranian government body collecting the tolls. Bessent declared the US would "aggressively target any actors involved — directly or indirectly — in facilitating tolls."

The warning was aimed "in particular" at Oman, per Bessent's own statement, according to Reason.

The irony is real: The US built its sanctions empire on the premise that anyone touching the US financial system had to choose between Iranian markets and American access. Now Iran is running the same play — forcing countries to choose between US support and their petrochemical supply chains. China has already chosen. Beijing invoked its own blocking statute this month, ordering refineries to keep buying Iranian oil regardless of US sanctions.

This is not a minor footnote. It's a stress test of American economic leverage — and it's happening right now, in real time, while diplomats talk.

What the Critics Are Saying

Former National Security Adviser John Bolton didn't mince words, calling the tentative deal a "big defeat for the United States" and a mistake driven by political pressure, according to The Hill.

Former Defense Secretary Mark Esper was more measured. He told The Hill a deal would lift "pressure on both sides" over energy prices and the Hormuz closure — framing it as a practical pressure-relief valve rather than a strategic win.

Even former Biden NSA Jake Sullivan — no fan of Trump's approach — told The Hill the tentative deal "may be the best of the very bad outcomes." That's a qualified endorsement. "Best of the bad options" is what you say when all the options are bad.

Reuters Breakingviews noted bluntly that a new US-Iran deal "could be as useless as the last" — a reference to the 2015 JCPOA that Trump walked away from in 2018 and Iran subsequently violated in multiple documented ways.

The Wall Street Journal's opinion section went further, arguing Iran's government is "incapable of diplomacy" and that ongoing negotiation efforts are not just useless but "an impediment to US and allied military success."

Interpreting the Coverage

Left-leaning outlets are framing this as a hopeful diplomatic breakthrough with Trump as the wild card who might blow it. This ignores the Iranian official openly saying concessions come through missiles — not negotiations.

Right-leaning voices are framing any deal as appeasement. This ignores the real logistical pressure the Hormuz closure is putting on global energy markets and US allies who import Gulf oil.

Both sides are underreporting the Hormuz tollbooth story — which is arguably the most consequential development of the week. Iran has effectively monetized a global chokepoint. The US sanctioned the collection agency. China told its refineries to pay anyway. That is a direct challenge to the dollar-based sanctions system that has been America's most powerful non-military tool for 30 years.

What Happens Next

No deal exists yet. Trump has made public demands that any serious agreement must include. Iran's officials are publicly saying the opposite of what US officials are privately claiming. And while diplomats talk, Iran is running a tollbooth on 21% of the world's oil supply and China is openly defying US sanctions to keep buying.

For regular Americans: gas prices, shipping costs, and inflation are all downstream of what happens in that strait. A deal that doesn't actually open Hormuz to unrestricted traffic is not a deal — it's a press release. Watch what Iran does with the waterway, not what negotiators say in hotel lobbies.