Tuesday, May 26, 2026
Today's Edition

EveryNews

Stories that matter, signal over noise

Politics

60 Days and Deferred Nuclear Question: What the US-Iran Deal Actually Contains

Oil fell 6% not because a deal was signed — but because markets believed in its possibility. However, key disagreements remain unresolved, and Iran's nuclear program remains outside the scope of the first phase.

Tetiana Suchkova-Ladik

By Tetiana Suchkova-Ladik

May 25, 2026 · 2 min read

60 Days and Deferred Nuclear Question: What the US-Iran Deal Actually Contains
Ілюстративне фото: WEI LEUNG / EPA

On May 25, oil prices reached a two-week minimum: Brent fell 5.7% — to $97.69 per barrel, and American WTI — by 6%, to $90.85. This is a market reaction to news of a possible deal between Washington and Tehran that could unblock the Strait of Hormuz — the narrow chokepoint of global oil transit.

What is known about the deal's content

According to Axios, which was confirmed by regional officials in an Associated Press report, the deal provides for a 60-day ceasefire: Iran demines the strait and opens it without any fees, the US removes the blockade of Iranian ports and provides sanctions exceptions for the sale of Iranian oil. Nuclear negotiations — a separate track that would start after the strait's opening.

"Significant, though not final, progress has been achieved"

— Secretary of State Marco Rubio, during a visit to India on May 24

Trump, in turn, wrote on social media that he is not in a hurry and that the deal is "not even fully agreed upon." The blockade of Hormuz, according to him, will continue until the final document is signed.

Where the real differences lie

The main stumbling block is enriched uranium. The US demands that Iran transfer or destroy its highly enriched uranium stockpiles — this was Trump's red line from the beginning of negotiations. Iran has publicly made no commitments on this issue, and Tehran has denied any reports of agreement to transfer stockpiles.

Pakistan is acting as a mediator: it was through Islamabad that the American "15-point proposal" was transmitted in March, and at the end of April — the updated Iranian response. Iran's leadership, according to Axios sources, remains internally divided on which nuclear concessions are acceptable.

  • US demands: elimination of the nuclear program, limitation of missile arsenal, opening of Hormuz without fees, cessation of support for armed groups
  • Iran proposed: opening of the strait and ceasefire — with nuclear negotiations postponed to a later stage
  • Current status: 60-day framework fixed, but details and timelines "have to be agreed upon later"

Why markets reacted so sharply

The Strait of Hormuz accounts for approximately 20% of global maritime oil traffic. Its blockade since the start of the conflict has kept Brent prices above $100. Even a partial prospect of unblocking triggers a reassessment of the risk premium in barrel prices — hence the 6% in a single session without any signed document.

But this logic has a downside: if negotiations reach a deadlock — especially over the nuclear issue — prices could rebound just as sharply. The week before May 22, Brent had already lost more than 5% amid "progress signals" that repeatedly turned out to be inconclusive.

The deal, as described by regional officials, is essentially a ceasefire with the main issue deferred: 60 days to reach agreement on what the negotiations depended on from the start. If the parties do not agree on the fate of Iranian uranium within this time, will Tehran have an incentive to continue making concessions — or will it simply use the window to resume oil trade?

Related

Latest

Business

EU Against Google: Why the Latest Fine Could Change More Than Previous Ones

# European Regulators Target Google Again — This Time Over Digital Markets Act Violations. What's Behind the Accusations and Why It Matters Beyond the Corporation European regulators have renewed their scrutiny of Google, this time focusing on alleged violations of the Digital Markets Act. The charges underscore Brussels' increasingly aggressive stance on big tech monopolies and what officials say are anticompetitive practices. The accusations center on how Google leverages its dominance across multiple digital services — from search to advertising to mobile platforms — to disadvantage competitors. Regulators claim the company is using its market power in ways that stifle innovation and limit consumer choice. The case carries significance far beyond Google itself. It signals how the EU is attempting to enforce its landmark Digital Markets Act, legislation designed to curb the gatekeeping power of tech giants. A potential penalty could set precedent for how other large technology companies face similar scrutiny. For consumers and smaller tech firms, the outcome could reshape the digital landscape by creating more room for competition. For Google, fines and operational restrictions could fundamentally alter its business model in Europe, the world's most stringent regulatory market. The case also reflects a broader geopolitical divide, with the EU pursuing a regulatory approach that contrasts sharply with the lighter-touch oversight favored in the United States.

May 26, 2026