The Latest Iran Deal Ignores the Lessons of the Past

James Acton | Carnegie Endowment for International Peace

Almost twenty-five years of diplomatic efforts to rein in Iran’s nuclear program hold a crucial lesson: Vagueness is a recipe for failure. Precision, even in an agreement that is more permissive than would be ideal, facilitates success. The memorandum of understanding (MOU) between the United States and Iran, which ends this year’s catastrophic war, ignores that lesson. Diplomacy is the right strategy for dealing with Iran’s nuclear program. However, without a significant course correction, the new deal risks becoming another that unravels because negotiators, under pressure to reach any agreement, buried their disagreements in imprecision.

US releases official agreement with Iran. Read the 14-point text

Alayna Treene, Kevin Liptak, and Mostafa Salem | CNN

The United States on Wednesday released the official text of the memorandum of understanding reached over the weekend with Iran. A senior US administration official read out the 14-point document, which spells out provisions for reopening the Strait of Hormuz, easing certain financial restrictions on Iran and sets out expectations for addressing Iran’s nuclear program during future technical talks.

The interim US-Iran deal leaves the fate of Tehran’s nuclear program still to be negotiated

Matthew Lee | Associated Press

The interim deal between the United States and Iran is supposed to usher in a two-month period that would address the most divisive issue between the longtime adversaries — Tehran’s nuclear program. Preventing Iran from attaining a nuclear bomb is a key reason that President Donald Trump said he launched the war alongside Israel in February, but the tentative agreement he has trumpeted leaves little runway to negotiate the long-running sticking point.

Finland tears up nuclear weapons ban in NATO shift

Milena Walde | Politico

Finnish lawmakers voted by a margin of 125 to 61 on Wednesday to lift the country’s longstanding ban on nuclear weapons, marking a major shift in Helsinki’s security posture as it deepens its integration with NATO. The measure clears the way for Finland to receive, transport and otherwise facilitate the movement of nuclear weapons on its territory as part of allied defense operations, removing a decades-old legal restriction that officials say no longer fits the country’s role inside NATO.

JIP to submit proposals seeking swift introduction of nuclear submarines

The Japan Times

The Japan Innovation Party (JIP), the junior partner in the country’s ruling coalition, on Wednesday called for the swift introduction of nuclear-powered submarines, citing China’s constant naval expansion into the Pacific… Elsewhere in the proposals, the JIP called for “realistic discussions” on Japan’s policy of not allowing nuclear weapons into the country, which is one of the country’s three nonnuclear principles, going into 2032 when the United States is expected to deploy sea-launched nuclear cruise missiles.

What Good Is a Nuclear Threshold Capability? Lessons from Iran’s Nuclear Program and Recent Regional Conflict

Eric Brewer | Texas National Security Review

The 2023–25 conflict in the Middle East was the first regional conflagration in which Iran was a nuclear threshold state. In theory, nuclear latency can confer strategic benefits, as Iran’s adversaries could be deterred from escalation or pressure by the risk that Tehran would quickly build nuclear weapons in response. Nuclear latency also comes with risks, however, including the risk of inviting a preventive military attack. Iran’s experience from 2023 until mid-2025 offers important insights into how nuclear hedgers perceive and try to manipulate the benefits and risks of nuclear latency, and whether latent nuclear deterrence is likely to succeed or fail.