Iran said any potential memorandum of understanding with the U.S. should not be viewed as a final agreement [1].
This distinction is critical as it manages expectations regarding the pace of diplomatic breakthroughs. By framing the document as a preliminary step, Tehran maintains leverage over specific demands while avoiding a premature commitment to a comprehensive deal.
Ismail Baghaei, the spokesperson for the Iranian Foreign Ministry, said that a level of understanding has been reached with the U.S. on many issues [2]. He said that the release of frozen Iranian assets is an integral condition for any such understanding [2].
Baghaei said, "Any potential memorandum of understanding between Tehran and Washington should not be considered a final agreement" [1]. This suggests that while dialogue is occurring, the two nations remain far from a definitive treaty.
Further reports indicate that a final agreement with Washington is not imminent [3]. According to the ministry spokesperson, nuclear issues are currently outside the scope of these negotiations [3].
While some reports suggested a memorandum might be signed in the coming days, the official Iranian position contradicts the idea of a near-term finality [1, 2]. The ministry maintains that the return of frozen funds is a non-negotiable prerequisite before any final deal can be reached [2].
Baghaei's comments underscore a strategy of incrementalism, seeking immediate financial relief before tackling more complex geopolitical or nuclear disputes.
“"Any potential memorandum of understanding between Tehran and Washington should not be considered a final agreement"”
Tehran is attempting to decouple immediate financial gains from broader diplomatic concessions. By insisting that frozen assets be released as a prerequisite and keeping nuclear talks off the table for now, Iran is seeking a low-risk path to economic relief without granting the U.S. the comprehensive concessions typically required for a final nuclear or security pact.
