In July 2015 Iran signed the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) with the US and several other countries to restrain its nuclear programme in exchange for extensive relief from economic sanctions. The 10-year agreement reached under the Barak Obama administration lasted for three years until 2018 when the US, under President Donald Trump in his first term, unilaterally withdrew from the deal. In response to this withdrawal and to deadly Western attacks on prominent Iranians in 2020, including one by the United States, Iran resumed its nuclear activities a year later.
US-Iranian talks resumed through a brief diplomatic track in April 2025, with Oman’s mediation aiming to reach a nuclear agreement, but it ended when Israel – which opposed the talks – launched airstrikes against Iran on 13 June. President Trump’s policy shifted sharply from talks with Iran to supporting Israel’s unprovoked attacks before directly joining the war by striking Iranian nuclear facilities. Trump later announced a bilateral ceasefire to end the war and initiated a 60-day diplomatic process aimed at securing a permanent deal.
On 28 February, the US and Israel jointly launched a war on Iran, decapitating its leadership, just as active US-Iranian negotiations were underway. Iran and the US eventually arrived at a ceasefire mediated by Pakistan in April for 60 days.
On 12 June Iran and the US signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) to end the war, which established a 60-day extension of the ceasefire to negotiate the final terms of a deal.
Although the MoU is an interim framework halting active military operations and setting a 60-day deadline for a final nuclear pact, comparisons with the 2015 JCPOA have grained traction. Trump and his Vice- President JD Vance have vehemently argued the MoU is “tougher” and better than the Obama-era JCPOA. Critics have criticised the massive financial concessions and reconstruction fund in the MoU, which they liken to the unfreezing of assets and sanctions relief to providing a “Marshall Plan” to a hostile regime before all nuclear issues are resolved.
While a full evaluation of the MoU is impossible before a final agreement is realised, Al-Ahram Weekly lists the most prominent side by side comparisons with JCPOA:
NATURE OF AGREEMENT
MoU: Political framework / 14-point interim memorandum intended to enable negotiations towards a final deal. US officials have described it as a broad framework rather than a detailed technical agreement.
JCPOA: A detailed, 160 page, legally structured multilateral nuclear agreement negotiated by Iran, the US, the UK, France, Germany, Russia, China, and the EU.
OBJECTIVE
MoU: End hostilities, reopen the Strait of Hormuz, provide temporary sanctions relief and create a pathway to a final settlement.
JCPOA: Restrict Iran’s nuclear programme in exchange for sanctions relief.
FOCUS ON NUCLEAR ISSUES
MoU: Nuclear questions are largely deferred to follow-on negotiations. The MoU states that enrichment, stockpiles and other nuclear issues will be resolved later. The MoU lacks immediate nuclear limits, acting instead as a “freeze-for-freeze” commitment while details on Iran’s highly enriched uranium stockpile are negotiated
JCPOA: Nuclear provisions are the core of the agreement, with detailed limits on enrichment, centrifuges, stockpiles and inspections.
ENRICHMENT
MoU: No final enrichment formula or stockpile limit yet; negotiations are ongoing. Iran agreed to discuss enrichment and stockpile disposition.
JCPOA: Iran allowed limited enrichment explicitly capped at 3.67 per cent U-235 for 15 years. Limited to 300 kg of low-enriched uranium. Excess material had to be exported, diluted, or converted.
INSPECTIONS
MoU: Iran has agreed to allow international inspectors back as part of the current process, but detailed verification arrangements are still being negotiated.
JCPOA: Extensive inspection regime by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) was a central feature.
SANCTIONS RELIEF
MoU: Commits to terminating all sanctions, tied to ongoing talks, and initiates immediate oil export waivers, alongside a framework for regional partners to raise at least $300 billion for Iranian reconstruction.
JCPOA: Tied phased sanctions relief to verifiable nuclear benchmarks overseen by international inspectors.
REGIONAL SECURITY
MoU: Major component. Includes ceasefire arrangements extending to Lebanon, reopening the Strait of Hormuz and regional deescalation mechanisms.
JCPOA: Primarily nuclear agreement; regional conflicts were largely outside its scope.
PARTIES INVOLVED
MoU: Primarily bilateral between US and Iran with mediation by Qatar and Pakistan, with outside states serving as mediators or facilitators rather than full negotiating parties responsible for enforcing the agreement. That makes it structurally much simpler than the JCPOA, but it also means fewer major powers are directly committed to guaranteeing or implementing its provisions.
JCPOA: Multilateral agreement involving Iran, the US, the UK, France, Russia, China, Germany, the European Union.
TIME HORIZON
MoU: Transitional framework with a rough 60-day negotiation window towards a final agreement.
JCPOA: Long-term agreement with provisions lasting 10-25 years depending on the issue.
LEVEL OF DETAIL
MoU: Relatively short and intentionally broad.
JCPOA: Highly detailed technical document with annexes and implementation mechanisms.
* A version of this article appears in print in the 25 June, 2026 edition of Al-Ahram Weekly.
Short link: