عربي English Türkçe اردو فارسى
Logo
Latest News
Features

US Draft for Syrian-Israeli Peace: Abandoning Iran and Hezbollah in Return for Golan Heights

Hof's latest book, "Reaching the Heights," reveals the details of secret talks between Damascus and Tel Aviv between 2009 and 2011.

Hof's latest book, "Reaching for the Heights: The Inside Story of a Secret Attempt to Reach a Syrian-Israeli Peace".
Hof's latest book, "Reaching for the Heights: The Inside Story of a Secret Attempt to Reach a Syrian-Israeli Peace".
TT
TT

US Draft for Syrian-Israeli Peace: Abandoning Iran and Hezbollah in Return for Golan Heights

Hof's latest book, "Reaching for the Heights: The Inside Story of a Secret Attempt to Reach a Syrian-Israeli Peace".
Hof's latest book, "Reaching for the Heights: The Inside Story of a Secret Attempt to Reach a Syrian-Israeli Peace".

Frederic C. Hof, the American diplomat, was "living the dream" between 2009 and 2011 of achieving peace between Syria and Israel. The idea first occurred to him when he visited Damascus as an exchange student when he was 16. Forty-five years later, he had the opportunity to turn the idea in a reality. But like all other lost chances for peace, he soon reached a failure that will haunt him for the rest of his life.

Hof details the peak of optimism and the slide towards the abyss of disappointment in his latest book, "Reaching for the Heights: The Inside Story of a Secret Attempt to Reach a Syrian-Israeli Peace", which was published by the United States Institute of Peace Press.

Hof had kicked of his peace mediation during the term of former President Barack Obama. His mediation differed from others that were based on "land for peace", meaning Israel would return the occupied Golan Heights to Syria, in exchange for Damascus normalizing ties with Israel.

Hof's approach was based on a different exchange: Restoring land in exchange for strategic positioning. What does that mean? Tel Aviv would return the Golan, while Damascus would abandon its alliances and military ties with Iran, Hezbollah and Hamas.

This was at the heart of secret American talks between 2009 and 2011.

Hof was among the first officials to suggest adopting the June 4, 1967 line for peace between Syria and Israel. He often wonders if Syrian President Bashar Assad truly wanted the "Golan - strategic positioning" peace deal, especially after he consolidated his alliance with Tehran and Hezbollah in wake of the 2011 Syria protests.

Eleven years after the eruption of the protests, Syria is now divided into three zones of influence, Iran and Russia are heavily involved in the country, and Israel strikes "Iranian positions" with Moscow's silent approval. The United States and Turkey boast military presence in other parts of the country.

Several secret and open initiatives and steps towards normalization with Damascus have been proposed in exchange for it to abandon its ties with Iran and Hezbollah. Several lessons can be derived from Hof's efforts over a decade ago.

The peace process was launched from Madrid in 1991. Soon after, several secret and declared Syrian-Israeli negotiations were held. In 1993, then US President Bill Clinton received a pledge from Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin that Israel would fully withdraw from the Golan in exchange for establishing peaceful relations and making security arrangements. This was known as Rabin's "deposit".

Ensuing American efforts led nowhere until 2000 when Syria and Israel were on the verge of signing a deal. But disputes over the withdrawal line in the Golan led to their collapse.

Efforts were revived with Assad's arrival to power. Turkey led a mediation in 2007 and 2009. Damascus wanted Israel to withdraw to the June 4 line. Discussions also tackled security relations and attempts at normalizing ties. Ankara even proposed a direct meeting between Assad and then Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert. The efforts ultimately collapsed when Israel launched an offensive against Gaza without informing Ankara.

Hof joined the US State Department in 2009. That same year, he traveled to Damascus and Tel Aviv to test whether the negotiations could resume. In 2010, he made progress in persuading Israeli leaders of the security benefits of achieving peace with Syria, a shift from the previous "land for peace approach."

The efforts continued with an air of optimism. In 2011, Hof pressed for then Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to hold a direct meeting with Assad. In February of that year, Assad informed visiting American senators that peace with Israel must be based on "specific references" that cover land and security issues. Hof and US envoy Dennis Ross then set about drafting these references.

On February 28, 2011, Assad met with Hof in Damascus. He agreed to the "specific references related to security", which entail ending Syrian activities and relations that pose a security threat to Israel, said the envoy. Assad also stressed that Lebanon, Iran and Hezbollah would commit to the peace treaty between Syria and Israel. Assad's demand that Israel withdraw to the June 4 line remained a central issue throughout the talks.

On March 2, Hof relayed the details of his talks with Assad to Netanyahu, who expressed his satisfaction with them, declaring that the mediation and opportunity for peace were "real."

The Syrian protests erupted in mid-March and Syrian security forces reacted violently to protesters in Daraa. The mediation was consequently suspended due to the "official chaos" in Syria. Hof sought to visit Damascus, but the White House barred him from talking with Assad given the regime's brutal crackdown on the protests.

Soon after, American officials started to call on Assad to step down and clear the way for democracy in Syria.

As Syria plunged into war, former US President Donald Trump officially recognized Israeli sovereignty over the Golan Heights in March 2019, dashing the previous peace efforts.

Draft peace agreement
Prior to the eruption of the war in Syria, the series of talks between Damascus, Tel Aviv and Washington had led to a draft Syrian-Israeli peace agreement. Key among its articles was for Damascus to distance itself from Iran and Hezbollah.

The deal would end the state of war between Syria and Israel and lead to peace. The fulfilment of the agreement demanded actions from both parties. Diplomatic relations would also be established.

No party would threaten the other and they must abide by international laws and the UN Charter to that end. They must also cease supporting any efforts or plans by a party, representing another state, aimed at threatening Syria or Israel.

The agreement would see Syria and Israel resolving disputes through peaceful means. They would end and bar any activity on their territories that would help regular or non-regular forces that are seeking to harm another country.

No party would transfer weapons or military equipment to Hezbollah in Lebanon or allow for operations to be carried out from its territories. Syria must also cease its military assistance to Hamas and other Palestinian groups.

Syria and Israel would commit to achieving Arab-Israeli peace, while realizing that that would entail peace between the Palestinians and Israelis and Lebanon and Israel. Syria and Israel would exert their utmost efforts to achieve these goals, said the draft treaty.

To that end, Syria would be demanded to sever its relations with the Iranian Revolutionary Guards Corps, including its Quds Force.

Hof presented the draft agreement to Assad in Damascus in February 2011. The American official spoke of his keenness on achieving peace between Syria and Israel and establishing amicable formal relations between Damascus and Washington. Assad reacted positively to his proposal, wrote Hof in his book.

Hof handed Assad the draft agreement. The Syrian leader noted that many of the points related to Lebanon, with one explicitly mentioning it. He wondered if it would be appropriate to mention Lebanon in a Syrian-Israeli peace agreement. That was his only reservation, recalled Hof.

On the points related to Hezbollah, Assad told Hof that everyone will be surprised with how quickly the party's leader, Hassan Nasrallah, would commit to the rules once Syria and Israel declare that they have reached peace. Hof said that he would be the first to be surprised. Assad then explained to him that Nasrallah was Arab, not Persian. Moreover, he said that Nasrallah would no longer be able to retain his position as "resistance" leader if peace is established. Assad even described Hezbollah as the only real Lebanese political party.

Hof expected the meeting with Assad to take hours as he mulled the treaty, but the Syrian president "eagerly" agreed to it with the talks lasting no more than 50 minutes.

Most Viewed

 
 
Features

With a Stalemate in Ukraine and Discontent at Home, Putin Seems Ready to Escalate His War

Russia's President Vladimir Putin attends a welcoming ceremony before a meeting with Kazakhstan's President Kassym-Jomart Tokayev in Astana, Kazakhstan May 28, 2026. (Reuters)
Russia's President Vladimir Putin attends a welcoming ceremony before a meeting with Kazakhstan's President Kassym-Jomart Tokayev in Astana, Kazakhstan May 28, 2026. (Reuters)
TT
TT

With a Stalemate in Ukraine and Discontent at Home, Putin Seems Ready to Escalate His War

Russia's President Vladimir Putin attends a welcoming ceremony before a meeting with Kazakhstan's President Kassym-Jomart Tokayev in Astana, Kazakhstan May 28, 2026. (Reuters)
Russia's President Vladimir Putin attends a welcoming ceremony before a meeting with Kazakhstan's President Kassym-Jomart Tokayev in Astana, Kazakhstan May 28, 2026. (Reuters)

Facing a battlefield stalemate in Ukraine and growing war fatigue among Russians, President Vladimir Putin appears ready to try to change the narrative around the conflict.

He looks likely to sharply escalate the Russian aerial attacks on the Ukrainian capital in the hope it will shore up his sagging domestic approval ratings and persuade an increasingly pessimistic audience at home that Moscow is winning the war, now in its fifth year, The Associated Press said.

Russia’s warning to carry out “consistent and systematic” missile strikes on Kyiv, accompanied by a call for evacuating foreign embassies from the capital, signals Putin’s intention to expand Russia's barrage despite the heavy costs and potential international outrage.

Massive drills of Russia's nuclear forces earlier this month and a series of belligerent statements from Moscow warning Kyiv’s European allies about possible retaliation for what the Kremlin cast as their involvement in Ukrainian drone attacks have underlined Putin’s intention to up the ante.

As Russia's advance stalls, Ukraine boosts long-range strikes

After a series of gains last year, Russia’s advances along the over 1,000-kilometer (600-mile) front line have ground to a near halt recently, and Ukraine’s armed forces have launched successful counterstrikes and reclaimed some ground.

“The character of the war is shifting in favor of Ukrainian forces, at least for now,” the Washington-based Institute for the Study of War said in a recent analysis. “Russian forces’ rates of advances are stagnating while Ukrainian forces are employing novel tactics and operational concepts in efforts to break out of positional warfare.”

The battlefield gridlock undermines Putin’s declared goal of quickly capturing the eastern Donetsk region still under Ukrainian control. Kyiv has rejected his demands to withdraw from the region as a condition for a ceasefire.

At the same time, Ukraine has significantly expanded its long-range strikes on Russian energy facilities and arms factories, inflicting increasing damage.

Putin scaled down the annual May 9 Victory Day parade, fearing Ukrainian drone strikes. Days later, a massive drone attack on Moscow's suburbs killed three and showed that even the densely protected capital isn’t fully immune from assault, shattering Kremlin efforts to cast the conflict as something distant that doesn’t affect ordinary Russians.

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy said the attacks were “significantly changing the situation — and, more broadly, the world’s perception of Russia’s war.”

Acknowledging the growing threat of Ukraine's deep strikes, Russian lawmakers this week approved a bill that says the country’s banks should bear the cost of installing drone-jamming systems on their premises, rather than rely on the military.

“From Russia’s perspective, these attacks are just going to get worse,” said Thomas Withington of the Royal United Services Institute in London. He added that Ukraine's increasingly audacious drone attacks were “exacting not only a political but an economic cost in Russia.”

The war is taking a toll on the Russian economy and morale

Russia’s economy has stagnated as the initial boost from massive military spending has petered out. The government has raised taxes and increased domestic borrowing to keep the budget deficit under control. And even though the US war in Iran has meant windfall oil revenues for Russia, fundamental economic challenges remain.

Putin is expected to play down the negative dynamics at next week's international economic forum in St. Petersburg, an annual event intended to showcase Russia’s achievements.

Nigel Gould-Davies of the London-based International Institute for Strategic Studies said in an analysis that “war-fueled high prices of capital, labor and goods, as well as rising taxes, have begun to depress the civilian sectors,” resulting in "a dual economy of overheated military output and civilian stagnation.”

While Russia has relied on volunteer soldiers to fight the war, offering them comparatively high wages and other benefits, Gould-Davies argued that “there are signs that this incentive may no longer be working effectively, and that Russia has begun to lose more troops than it can recruit.”

To sustain the war, the Kremlin will have to forcibly mobilize human and material resources, requiring it to “curtail the last remaining post-Soviet market freedoms, labor freedom, and freedom of movement,” he said.

In a sign of brewing discontent, some social media influencers previously loyal to the Kremlin have started to openly criticize government policies.

A move by authorities to restrict cellphone internet and block popular messaging apps has upset daily routines for millions, causing open grumbling. Natalya Kasperskaya, a prominent IT entrepreneur and a staunch Kremlin supporter, harshly criticized the shutdowns and attempts to block virtual private networks, warning that they cause massive damage to the tech sector.

Tatyana Stanovaya, a Russia expert who founded the R.Politik newsletter focused on Kremlin politics, noted the spreading Ukrainian drone attacks along with mobile internet shutdowns and rising taxes have eroded Putin’s standing. While he faces no immediate threats to his rule, “the gradual fading of Putin’s credibility is real,” she said.

In early spring, Russian opinion polls, including one by a government-run pollster, recorded a dip in Putin’s approval ratings, although they rose slightly in May in the state-controlled poll after the organization changed its methodology to include face-to-face interviews. Many observers believe the numbers may be inflated amid a widespread crackdown on dissent.

“Putin is losing his magic,” Alexander Baunov of the Carnegie Russia Eurasia Center wrote in a commentary. “Power remains undivided in his hands, but its spell is fading. Even loyalists complain about the mounting restrictions and repression, and once-upbeat businesspeople are now despondent.”

Russia's new threats to Ukraine and the West

Citing a May 22 Ukrainian drone attack on a college dormitory in Russian-occupied eastern Ukraine that Moscow said killed 21 people, Putin ordered a massive missile strike on Kyiv and its surrounding region. Sunday's barrage that involved Russia’s new hypersonic Oreshnik missile killed two, injured scores of others and destroyed or damaged many buildings.

On Monday, the Russian Foreign Ministry said Moscow will launch “consistent and systematic” strikes on Kyiv to target drone-making facilities and “decision-making centers.” It urged foreign diplomats to leave the capital — a demand rejected by Ukraine’s allies.

Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov called US Secretary of State Marco Rubio to warn him of the coming strikes and push for the evacuation of its diplomats.

“The danger in all of these wars as they continue and then they go on is that they always have the threat of escalation, of spreading into something new,” Rubio told reporters after the call.

The Iran war has effectively put US mediation efforts in Ukraine on hold and drained American missile arsenals, delaying the delivery of US-made Patriot missiles that Ukraine desperately needs to fend off Russian attacks.

Moscow-based military analyst Sergei Poletaev said Russia sees the shortage of air defense assets in Kyiv as an opportunity.

“Kyiv’s air defenses have been exhausted enough to make a massive attack efficient,” he said in a recent commentary.

Accompanying the declared blitz on Kyiv, Russia issued a barrage of threats aimed at Ukraine's European allies.

The Defense Ministry published a list of facilities in Europe that it said were involved in manufacturing drones and their components for Ukraine. And Moscow’s Foreign Intelligence Service warned the Baltic nations that their NATO membership won’t protect them from Moscow’s retaliation if they allow Ukraine to launch attacks from their territory. Those allies have denounced Moscow's claims.

“We are actually very, very close to direct military confrontation,” said Dmitry Polyansky, Russia’s envoy to the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe.

Features

Iran War Has Complicated Plans for an Int’l Force in Gaza That Has Yet to Materialize

Palestinians inspect the damage at the site of an Israeli strike on Wednesday in Gaza City, May 28, 2026. (Reuters)
Palestinians inspect the damage at the site of an Israeli strike on Wednesday in Gaza City, May 28, 2026. (Reuters)
TT
TT

Iran War Has Complicated Plans for an Int’l Force in Gaza That Has Yet to Materialize

Palestinians inspect the damage at the site of an Israeli strike on Wednesday in Gaza City, May 28, 2026. (Reuters)
Palestinians inspect the damage at the site of an Israeli strike on Wednesday in Gaza City, May 28, 2026. (Reuters)

The International Stabilization Force for Gaza was announced with great aplomb at the inaugural meeting of US President Donald Trump's Board of Peace in February. The American general tapped to lead the 20,000-strong force said it would ensure “future prosperity and enduring peace” after the devastating Israel-Hamas war.

Three months on, he still has no force to lead as none of the five countries that pledged troops have come through with any significant contributions.

Efforts to shore up the fragile ceasefire have stalled as Hamas has refused to disarm and Israel has seized more territory while continuing to strike what it says are militant targets, often killing civilians.

Indonesian commitment on indefinite hold

The biggest blow to the planned force came about a week after the US and Israel attacked Iran on Feb. 28, when Indonesia put its commitment of 8,000 troops on indefinite hold. Some 1,000 were to have been sent in April, followed by the remainder in June.

Indonesian's pledge was by far the largest of the group, which also includes Morocco, Kazakhstan, Kosovo and Albania. US Maj. Gen. Jasper Jeffers, who spoke at the Board of Peace event, was to command the force.

Indonesia suspended its plans over what Defense Minister Sjafrie Sjamsoeddin said last week seemed to be a lack of commitment from a distracted Washington, saying “we have not yet received any implementation guidelines.”

“New dynamics have emerged,” he told parliament. “Because the intensity of the conflict between US and Iranian forces remains very high, the BoP has tended to be left behind. Since the BoP has been left behind, the ISF has also been left behind.”

US attack on Iran influenced Indonesia's decision

Domestic issues may have factored into Indonesia's decision, said Muhammad Zulfikar Rakhmat, director of the Indonesia-Middle East/North Africa desk at Jakarta's Center for Economic and Law Studies.

The Iran war is extremely unpopular in Indonesia, the most populous Muslim country. The economy is suffering from soaring prices as a result of the conflict, and there is widespread skepticism of the Board of Peace.

“If you talk to the people on the street, I don’t think they believe that the Board of Peace will actually help the people of Gaza,” Rakhmat said. There are also concerns about sending troops to the Middle East when the economy is faltering, he added.

Indonesia lost four peacekeepers who were part of the United Nations mission in Lebanon during fighting between Israel and the Iran-backed Hezbollah. That has further soured public opinion on such international commitments, he said.

Board of Peace blames stalled ceasefire on Hamas

The US military’s Central Command declined to comment or make Jeffers available for an interview, referring all queries to the Board of Peace.

Board of Peace spokesman Brad Klapper also declined to comment on Indonesia's decision or the future of the stabilization force, pointing instead to May 21 remarks made at the UN by Nickolay Mladenov, a former Bulgarian defense minister who Trump appointed director of the Board of Peace.

Mladenov said the international force would not be able to begin operations until there was agreement and implementation of a second phase of the ceasefire, which would see Hamas disarm and Israel begin to withdraw. Israeli troops control some 60% of Gaza.

Mladenov has blamed the deadlock on Hamas, saying its disarmament is “non-negotiable” and is holding up progress on other fronts, including Israel's withdrawal and reconstruction.

“You cannot build a future with armed groups running the streets, hiding in tunnels and stockpiling weapons,” Mladenov said in Jerusalem this month. “You cannot deliver reconstruction with militias on every corner.”

Hamas blames delays on Israel

Hamas says Israel has repeatedly violated the ceasefire, holding up its further implementation, and has accused Mladenov of siding with Israel.

Israeli strikes have killed more than 880 Palestinians since the ceasefire, according to local health officials. Israel says it was responding to violations of the truce.

Hamas is also demanding Israel withdraw from areas seized since the start of the ceasefire, according to an Egyptian official with knowledge of the discussions, speaking on condition of anonymity to discuss closed-door talks. Egypt has long served as a mediator with Hamas.

Many of the countries that have pledged forces have refused to send troops without a deal on Hamas disarming, the official said.

Token forces committed and none yet known to be on the ground

Kazakhstan has said its support for the stabilization force would be limited to “the humanitarian component,” including sending medical units with a field hospital. Its Foreign Ministry did not respond to a request for comment.

Albania's Defense Ministry also declined to comment on its troop commitment, saying it was a “dynamic and ongoing process.”

Earlier this month, its chief of staff, Lt. Gen. Arben Kingji, told reporters that while the military had “participated in reconnaissance activities,” no troops had yet been sent. He said only a few would be dispatched as part of the stabilization force headquarters, without giving numbers, adding that further contributions would be considered.

Kosovo, which is expected to send 20 troops, said in April that it was in the “final phase of preparations.” The Defense Ministry did not reply to a request for an update.

Morocco's Foreign Ministry also did not reply. At the inaugural meeting of the Board of Peace, Foreign Minister Nasser Bourita said it would deploy “high-level military officers to the joint military command of the ISF.”

Indonesian turnaround can't be ruled out

Despite the delays from Indonesia, Rakhmat said it was too early to rule out eventual participation in the stabilization force.

President Prabowo Subianto is a former army general who has been keen to raise Indonesia’s profile on the world stage and wants to avoid jeopardizing economic ties with the US, Rakhmat said.

“Prabowo wants to strengthen ties to Washington and sign different agreements with the US, so to completely withdraw and completely cancel the plan, I don't think it's on the table,” he said.

Features

What We Know and Don't Know about the Emerging Deal to End the Iran War

Government supporters hold Iranian flags and pictures of Iran's Supreme Leader, Mojtaba Khamenei, during a ceremony honoring the armed forces and those killed in the war with Israel and the US in Tehran, Iran, Sunday, May 24, 2026. (AP)
Government supporters hold Iranian flags and pictures of Iran's Supreme Leader, Mojtaba Khamenei, during a ceremony honoring the armed forces and those killed in the war with Israel and the US in Tehran, Iran, Sunday, May 24, 2026. (AP)
TT
TT

What We Know and Don't Know about the Emerging Deal to End the Iran War

Government supporters hold Iranian flags and pictures of Iran's Supreme Leader, Mojtaba Khamenei, during a ceremony honoring the armed forces and those killed in the war with Israel and the US in Tehran, Iran, Sunday, May 24, 2026. (AP)
Government supporters hold Iranian flags and pictures of Iran's Supreme Leader, Mojtaba Khamenei, during a ceremony honoring the armed forces and those killed in the war with Israel and the US in Tehran, Iran, Sunday, May 24, 2026. (AP)

A deal appears to be emerging between the United States and Iran to end the war and open the Strait of Hormuz, and US President Donald Trump over the weekend said it had been “largely negotiated.”

It is not clear when or how the deal might be finalized and when its various parts will take effect. Trump spoke after calls with allies in the Middle East, including a separate call with Israel. Details come from two regional officials and a US official who spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss the sensitive negotiations.

Here’s what we know and don’t know:

The war would end

In the 12 weeks since the US and Israel launched the war with attacks on Iran that killed senior officials including Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, Tehran has insisted that any deal focus on ending the fighting on all fronts. That includes Lebanon, where the Iranian-backed Hezbollah militant group has been fighting Israel since two days into the war.

A fragile ceasefire has held since April 7. An end to the war would ease concerns throughout a region that saw Gulf states like the United Arab Emirates struck by Iranian missiles and drones. It would allow for global shipping, including an estimated 20% of the world's oil and natural gas, to begin flowing through the Strait of Hormuz again. It also would allow the rebuilding of energy and other infrastructure in the region.

Both regional officials said the draft deal includes an end to the war between Israel and Hezbollah, as well as a commitment to not interfere in the domestic affairs of countries in the region including Iran. That’s a critical reference to Iran’s support for proxies, which also include the Houthi militants in Yemen, Hamas militants in Gaza and Shiite armed groups in Iraq.

The US wants Israel to have a free hand to respond to what it views as threats in Lebanon while Iran rejects it, one regional official said. The US official said the deal would guarantee Israel’s right to act against imminent threats in self-defense.

The Strait of Hormuz would reopen gradually

Iran’s nuclear program, missile program and support for armed proxies were the stated reasons for the US and Israel attacking Iran. But Tehran’s retaliatory grip on the Strait of Hormuz quickly shot to the top of global concerns as hundreds of ships carrying oil, natural gas, fertilizer and other supplies were stranded.

Under the emerging agreement, the strait would gradually reopen in parallel with the US ending the blockade of Iran’s ports it launched on April 17, the regional officials said. The blockade has limited Iran’s ability to ship its oil and bring in badly needed cash for its long-suffering economy.

The US would allow Iran to sell its oil through sanctions waivers, said one of the officials, who has been briefed on the negotiations. Sanctions relief and the release of Iran’s billions of dollars in frozen funds would be negotiated during a 60-day period, the official said.

Iran would give up its stockpile of highly enriched uranium

Iran’s nuclear program and international concerns over its possible pursuit of a nuclear weapon underlie all tensions, and the US and Israel have considered highly complex military operations to go in and take out its highly enriched uranium.

Under the potential deal, Tehran would agree to give up that stockpile of highly enriched uranium, according to the regional officials. One official, with direct knowledge of the negotiations, said how Iran would give it up would be subject to further talks over the 60-day period. Some would likely be diluted and the rest transferred to a third country, potentially Russia, the official said. Russia has offered to take it.

A US official confirmed the 60-day period and said if Iran doesn’t give up its stockpile, there will be no sanctions relief.

Iran has 440.9 kilograms (972 pounds) of uranium that is enriched up to 60% purity, a short, technical step from weapons-grade levels of 90%, according to the International Atomic Energy Agency.

Iran says it has an “inalienable” right to nuclear technology while insisting its program is peaceful. On Sunday, President Masoud Pezeshkian told state TV they were ready “to assure the world that we are not after a nuclear weapon.”

Trump on Sunday on social media said that “our relationship with Iran is becoming a much more professional and productive one. They must understand, however, that they cannot develop or procure a Nuclear Weapon or Bomb.”

What appears to be missing

Other issues have not been mentioned in descriptions of the emerging deal, including the status of Iran's uranium enrichment.

Another is Iran's missile program, which Israel in particular has sought to destroy.

And while the United States and Israel entered the war with stated ambitions of seeing Iranians rise up against their government after nationwide protests early in the year, any discussion of leadership change in Tehran appears to be out.

As for Iran's past stated aims during negotiations, there appears to be no mention of any withdrawal of US forces from the region, or for reparations for the damage the war has caused.