Washington/Tehran, June 18 (UNI)

Senior US officials have clarified that Iran will not automatically gain access to frozen assets, sanctions relief, or a multibillion-dollar economic reconstruction package merely by signing the upcoming memorandum of understanding (MoU) with Washington.

The clarification follows the release of the 14-point memorandum on Wednesday, which prompted varying and sometimes contradictory interpretations in both Washington and Tehran.

During a background briefing, US officials emphasized that the MoU is a broad framework designed to facilitate future negotiations rather than a final agreement. As such, it does not commit the United States to providing immediate economic benefits. Any incentives, they said, would be contingent upon Iran’s compliance and measurable progress toward a comprehensive settlement, according to Iran International.

Officials also rejected claims circulating in Iranian media that the agreement would unlock substantial financial gains before a final deal is reached.

Addressing the provision outlining a reconstruction and economic development plan valued at at least $300 billion, they stressed that the text does not obligate Washington to provide post-war funding or direct financial assistance. Instead, the clause establishes a pathway toward potential sanctions relief if Iran fulfills its commitments, potentially encouraging future investment from governments and private-sector entities.

The officials further noted that any sanctions relief would be tied to verifiable advances in addressing concerns over Iran’s nuclear programme. Economic benefits, they said, would be granted only in exchange for meaningful nuclear concessions, including measures related to Iran’s stockpile of highly enriched uranium.

Regarding Iran’s frozen assets, the Trump administration stated that the MoU links any asset release to the implementation of the agreement and progress in broader negotiations. Officials said Tehran had already accepted provisions stipulating that no funds would be released automatically and that access would depend entirely on Iranian compliance and demonstrations of good faith.

While some funds could potentially be made available during the negotiation process, officials stressed that this would occur only if Iran undertakes specific actions requested by Washington.

US officials also dismissed broader interpretations of the memorandum’s provisions concerning the Strait of Hormuz, stating that the agreement focuses on reopening the strategic waterway and restoring commercial shipping rather than creating a broader Gulf security framework.

On military matters, officials said Washington has no immediate plans to reduce its military presence in the region following the signing of the memorandum. Any future adjustments would depend on Iran’s adherence to the agreement and progress in negotiations.

The officials highlighted the importance of direct communication channels established during the conflict between US forces and the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), noting that these channels helped reduce misunderstandings and facilitated diplomatic contacts during and after the conflict.

They also rejected suggestions that nuclear issues had been excluded from the memorandum, pointing out that the text explicitly commits both sides to discussions on Iran’s enriched uranium stockpile and broader nuclear activities.

The memorandum is expected to be formally signed on Friday, after which negotiations aimed at reaching a final settlement are scheduled to begin.

000

Washington/Jerusalem, Jun 4

The recent spat between Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and US President Donald Trump over Lebanon has brought to light a particularly delicate reality for the Israeli leader, showing how his military options, and possibly his very political future, remain closely tied to a White House that does not always share his appetite for destruction and escalation.

While Trump and Netanyahu have maintained close coordination through the entirety of their war with Iran and have maintained frequent contact, officials on both sides have come to acknowledge that at some point, Washington and Jerusalem are going to see a divergence in their strategic priorities, with some within Netanyahu's circle believing that moment has arrived, reports Axios.

Netanyahu himself acknowledged this week that it remained "an open question" whether he and Trump were fully aligned on how the war with Tehran should end.

The issue comes at a politically sensitive time for the Israeli premier, amid approaching elections in October, while Netanyahu continues facing mounting pressure at home.

Critics argue he has yet to fulfil his pledge to eliminate Hamas, while his broader ambition of bringing about regime change in Iran remains unrealised. At the same time, continuing Hezbollah drone and missile attacks from Lebanon have fuelled public frustration.

Amidst such a backdrop, Netanyahu vowed to launch major strikes against Hezbollah targets in Beirut. However, the plan was shelved following a tense phone call with Trump, whose sole priority remains securing a diplomatic breakthrough with Iran.

According to sources familiar with the conversation, Trump warned that a major escalation in Beirut could derail ongoing efforts to keep negotiations with Tehran on track.

The fallout from the two leaders' conversation quickly found its way into Israeli politics, with opposition figures and even some right-wing allies accusing Netanyahu of allowing Israel's military decisions to essentially being dictated by Washington.

"It was a terrible phone call. Trump really hammered Bibi. He demanded that he immediately back down from the plan to strike Beirut in order to not blow up the situation in Lebanon — and through that, the negotiations with Iran," an Israeli source said.

Neither leader publicly denied reports of the disagreement. Netanyahu later told CNBC that he and Trump had disagreed before but had always maintained a strong working relationship. Trump, speaking separately, also stressed that he continued to work closely with the Israeli prime minister.

Behind the scenes, however, differences appear far more substantial than just a single dispute over Lebanon.
According to senior US officials, Trump's single biggest focus is on bringing the Iran war to an end, while Netanyahu remains deeply sceptical of any settlement that leaves Tehran's leadership intact.

"Sometimes Bibi doesn't know when to stop," one US official said.
Israeli officials have said that Netanyahu is increasingly concerned that Washington could end up imposing tighter restrictions on Israeli military operations in Lebanon, requiring greater US approval before future strikes are carried out.

Those concerns come as diplomatic efforts continue. Following talks in Washington between Israeli and Lebanese representatives, both sides announced plans for a potential comprehensive ceasefire, dependent on steps by Hezbollah.

Whether Hezbollah accepts those conditions remains uncertain. Israeli officials believe that if attacks continue, Netanyahu could attempt to persuade Trump to support a tougher military response, including strikes in Beirut.

000