The US and Iran are presenting sharply different interpretations of a newly announced peace agreement intended to end months of conflict, while Israel has voiced concerns over the deal's implications for its security and its scope regarding the Lebanese group Hezbollah.
US President Donald Trump declared Sunday that a peace agreement with Iran had been completed, announcing the reopening of the Strait of Hormuz and the end of a US naval blockade.
Pakistani Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif, whose country played a mediating role alongside Qatar, also said the two sides had reached a peace agreement following intensive negotiations.
Iranian officials, however, have described the arrangement differently. Deputy Foreign Minister Kazem Gharibabadi said a final text had been agreed on and would be signed in Switzerland on June 19.
He added that Iran had included all of its key positions in the draft memorandum and said the full text would be published after the official signing.
Gharibabadi also said the complete lifting of all sanctions against Iran, including primary and secondary sanctions, as well as the termination of UN Security Council and Board of Governors resolutions, would be among the issues discussed during a 60-day negotiation period.
He added that the nuclear issue would also be part of the negotiations, adding the talks would begin only after verification of US commitments regarding ending the war, lifting the blockade, and releasing frozen Iranian assets.
The most significant discrepancy between the two sides concerns Iran's nuclear program.
A Trump administration official said the draft agreement includes the removal and destruction of Iran's nuclear materials and the dismantling of its nuclear program, with sanctions relief tied to verified compliance.
Iranian media, meanwhile, reported that Tehran has not accepted any new nuclear obligations under the agreement.
According to Iran's official IRNA news agency, nuclear issues will instead be addressed during the 60-day negotiation period following the signing ceremony.
Another point of divergence concerns the status of the agreement itself.
Trump has repeatedly described the deal as completed, while Iranian officials have emphasized that the agreement has not yet been formally signed and that key provisions will only take effect after implementation and verification mechanisms are established.
The future of Lebanon and Hezbollah also remains a major source of uncertainty.
Trump, Pakistani officials, and Iranian representatives have indicated that the agreement covers all fronts in the conflict, including Lebanon.
Israel, however, has maintained that its confrontation with Hezbollah is separate from the US-Iran arrangement. Israeli officials said the deal does not limit Israel's ability to respond to threats from the Lebanese group.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's government has publicly supported efforts to end hostilities between Washington and Tehran but warned that certain terms of the agreement could undermine Israeli security.
Israeli media have also highlighted growing tensions between Trump and Netanyahu. Reports said Trump criticized Israeli airstrikes in Beirut, arguing they should not have occurred while the US and Iran were nearing a peace agreement.
Israeli officials have expressed concern that Iran may be receiving concessions without making sufficient commitments on its nuclear activities, while also questioning whether Hezbollah-related issues have been adequately addressed.
The differing narratives underscore the uncertainty surrounding the agreement ahead of a planned signing ceremony in Geneva on June 19 and suggest that major disagreements remain unresolved despite claims of a breakthrough.
