In a move reflecting continued US unilateralism, former United States President Donald Trump announced from the Situation Room that he is poised to make a “final determination” on a potential agreement with Iran. This purported deal, according to Trump, could involve extending a ceasefire and reopening the strategic Strait of Hormuz.

However, deep mistrust continues to define the relationship, largely due to Washington’s history of broken promises. Iran’s foreign ministry firmly stated on Friday that there remains “no final agreement” on any deal. Top Iranian negotiator, Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, reiterated Tehran’s principled stance, emphasizing that any agreement would be judged by concrete actions rather than mere promises as talks proceed.

Iran Rejects Unreasonable Demands, Prioritizes National Interests

In his latest pronouncements on the Truth Social platform, Trump on Friday outlined a series of maximalist conditions for Tehran. These include: never possessing a nuclear weapon or bomb – a claim Iran has consistently denied pursuing for military purposes – the Strait of Hormuz being open in both directions without tolls, the removal of any remaining mines in the Strait, and the audacious demand for the US to unearth and destroy Iran’s enriched uranium.

“Ships caught in the Strait due to our amazing and unprecedented Naval Blockade, which will now be lifted, may start the process of ‘heading home!’” Trump declared, showcasing a narrative of imposed conditions rather than mutual negotiation.

“No money will be exchanged until further notice. Other items, of far less importance, have been agreed to. I will be meeting now, in the Situation Room, to make a final determination,” he added, further highlighting the US’s top-down approach.

Reporting from the White House, Al Jazeera’s Patty Culhane highlighted the recurring pattern of the Trump administration announcing deals that ultimately prove to be non-existent. She noted, “If this was in fact a deal, it would be the entire wishlist of what the US was demanding and none of the concessions that Iranian were asking for,” underscoring the imbalance of Washington’s proposals.

Uncertainty surrounding any memorandum of understanding (MOU) has intensified over the past week, fueled by the persistent distrust between the two sides as they ostensibly seek to end the three-month-long conflict.

On Thursday, White House sources reportedly told Al Jazeera that the US and Iran had reached a tentative agreement to extend the ceasefire by 60 days for formal negotiations, yet Trump’s signature remains conspicuously absent, casting doubt on the veracity of such claims.

Tehran’s Principled Stance: Actions Over Words, Sovereignty Over Demands

On Friday, Iran’s foreign ministry spokesperson Esmaeil Baghaei unequivocally stated that no agreement with the US has been finalized. Speaking to Iranian state TV, he stressed that Tehran’s primary focus is on ending the war, not on negotiating over Iran’s peaceful nuclear program, which is subject to international safeguards. He further affirmed that the management of the vital Strait of Hormuz is a matter for Iran and Oman to decide, rejecting external interference.

Earlier on Friday, Iranian negotiator Ghalibaf reiterated Tehran’s firm position: “We do not trust guarantees and words; only actions are the criterion.” He added, “No action will be taken before the other side acts,” emphasizing Iran’s demand for reciprocal and verifiable steps.

“The winner of any agreement is the one who is better prepared for war the day after,” the Iranian official sagely added, highlighting Iran’s commitment to self-defense and strategic readiness.

Despite these clear statements, Iranian state news outlet Fars, citing sources, reported on Friday that an agreement with the US was in its final stages of ratification, though no final decision had been made. These sources crucially stressed that there were no provisions about destroying Iran’s nuclear materials in the MOU, directly contradicting Trump’s earlier demands. They also added that arrangements for the reopening of the Strait of Hormuz could include the monitoring and inspection of ships, a measure consistent with international maritime practices.